Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Remove cups from default profile to solve circular deps

[Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>]

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> On 03/04/2010 08:57 PM, Patrick Nagel wrote:
>> Obviously, users who "re-install" Gentoo the way you do will have less
>> difficulties resolving a circular dependency than those who are just 
>> following
>> the guide and getting their first Gentoo experience.
>
> I think that the cups issue is probably worth mentioning in the 
> Handbook.  Whether it is there by default or not lots of people get 
> burned by it.  A little advanced warning would help.
>
> I think that at the very least following the handbooks to the letter 
> should never lead to an error.
>
> I think that a good argument can be made for or against having cups in 
> the desktop profile - this might actually be the sort of thing a 
> survey would be useful to address.
>
> I think that is separate from the circular dependency issue.  As long 
> as we have an unresolved circular dependency I think cups should be 
> off the list.  However, I'd be the first to agree that this is a 
> short-term solution.
>
> The problem is that we only have two long-term solutions so far:
>
> 1.  A smarter package manager that can work through these dependencies 
> automatically.
>
> 2.  Splitting packages like poppler that have these issues.
>
> Both of these need effort to address.  #1 requires PM work, and #2 
> requires an ongoing commitment to do more work to keep poppler working.
>
> Unless somebody can come up with a #3 at this point the most 
> constructive thing anybody can do is help out.  A good place to start 
> would be to write up some patches to the handbook that clearly explain 
> how to deal with this problem.
>
> I'm not sure I agree with the poppler maintainers but they may have 
> reasons that aren't apparent to me and the fact is that it is a whole 
> lot easier to tell somebody how to maintain a package when I'm not the 
> one actually doing the work.  Nothing gets results in FOSS like dirty 
> hands...
>
> Rich
>
>

Well said.  I agree with this.  The devs may not be able to fix this 
specific issue but circular deps come up.  We need a long term fix and 
now is as good a time as any to start thinking of one.  Heck, I don't 
expect this to be done this week.  It may take months to fix this or 
just figure out a way to do it.  I just know this is becoming a problem 
and it isn't getting any better even tho people are trying.  I would 
like to see a solution like happened with the blocks issue.  Just some 
way that is easy for the devs to keep the tree clean but also have a 
package manager that can work around this.  Even if it means portage 
spitting out a message that some packages shouldn't be used during the 
update because some packages have to be uninstalled first, that would be 
good.  Let portage wait for a yes/no reply before doing the updates and 
doing them as close to first thing as possible.  Read that as, don't 
compile openoffice then come back to the deps part.

Progress.

Dale

:-)  :-)