Hi, all. Just wondering if changes to comps for F15 (GNOME 3) have been considered already. It'd be good to have any necessary changes made ASAP so that nightlies start to resemble what F15 final will look like, as much as possible.
For a start it seems sensible to make gnome-shell mandatory, and maybe gnome-panel would be default rather than mandatory. Per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658605 , we'll also need gnome-themes-standard to be installed by default, and I'm not sure anything currently causes that; though adding it to comps may not be the best approach, as that won't fix updates.
Are there any other necessary changes?
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 13:43 +0000, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hi, all. Just wondering if changes to comps for F15 (GNOME 3) have been considered already. It'd be good to have any necessary changes made ASAP so that nightlies start to resemble what F15 final will look like, as much as possible.
For a start it seems sensible to make gnome-shell mandatory, and maybe gnome-panel would be default rather than mandatory. Per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658605 , we'll also need gnome-themes-standard to be installed by default, and I'm not sure anything currently causes that; though adding it to comps may not be the best approach, as that won't fix updates.
Are there any other necessary changes?
I've been meaning to do this before Christmas, but gtk3 kept me busy. I'll get to it this week, hopefully.
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 13:43 +0000, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hi, all. Just wondering if changes to comps for F15 (GNOME 3) have been considered already. It'd be good to have any necessary changes made ASAP so that nightlies start to resemble what F15 final will look like, as much as possible.
For a start it seems sensible to make gnome-shell mandatory, and maybe gnome-panel would be default rather than mandatory. Per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658605 , we'll also need gnome-themes-standard to be installed by default, and I'm not sure anything currently causes that; though adding it to comps may not be the best approach, as that won't fix updates.
Are there any other necessary changes?
I've made a first pass over comps and the spin kickstart files. Some things I've made:
- replace gnome-themes by gnome-themes-standard, as you've noticed - don't include librsvg3 (which had only a very brief existence) - update our exclusions to exclude libreoffice instead of ooo
After these changes, I end up with a 730M desktop spin, even without rhythmbox.
As far as further necessary changes, I see at least the following:
- finish packaging cantarell fonts, and include them
- smoke out perl dependencies again
- look at other ways to save some space
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 10:55 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
I've made a first pass over comps and the spin kickstart files. Some things I've made:
Cool, thanks.
- replace gnome-themes by gnome-themes-standard, as you've noticed
Again, should some change also be made to package dependencies so this is handled correctly on upgrades?
- look at other ways to save some space
alternatively: revisit the idea of shipping a larger image intended for USB or DVD? (did we do that for f14? I can't recall...)
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 10:55 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
I've made a first pass over comps and the spin kickstart files. Some things I've made:
Cool, thanks.
- replace gnome-themes by gnome-themes-standard, as you've noticed
Again, should some change also be made to package dependencies so this is handled correctly on upgrades?
- look at other ways to save some space
alternatively: revisit the idea of shipping a larger image intended for USB or DVD? (did we do that for f14? I can't recall...)
From memory it was a DVD through the alpha/beta testing process and
was shrunk back down to CD size in time for release.
Peter
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 16:13 +0000, Adam Williamson wrote:
- replace gnome-themes by gnome-themes-standard, as you've noticed
Again, should some change also be made to package dependencies so this is handled correctly on upgrades?
I've asked Ray to look into this and related theming changes.
With the de-emphasizing of theming in gnome3, some things don't make sense anymore, and we may end up dropping the fedora-gnome-theme package altogether.
I've also made some adjustments to the set of mandatory package in the gnome-desktop comps group (but that should not make any difference for the spin composition).
- look at other ways to save some space
alternatively: revisit the idea of shipping a larger image intended for USB or DVD? (did we do that for f14? I can't recall...)
It didn't happen back then. I think we can get back to 700M with some discipline.
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 11:54 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
It didn't happen back then. I think we can get back to 700M with some discipline.
one of the common themes of the F14 review cycle was ridiculing the lack of an office suite on the desktop image, particularly given the presence of 'useless' things like planner (I'm paraphrasing from the reviews, not giving my own personal opinion). I know we have good arguments against including an office suite, and I suspect planner is just in there as a hangover from when we tried to include GNOME Office, but there does seem to be a consistent impression in reviews that the current package choice seems bizarre. It's worth at least considering going to 1GB to have LibreOffice, I think, and if we don't, we should drop planner from the desktop spin as well as dropping LibreOffice, to avoid the apparent weirdness of having a planning tool but no other office apps.
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 17:07 +0000, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 11:54 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
It didn't happen back then. I think we can get back to 700M with some discipline.
one of the common themes of the F14 review cycle was ridiculing the lack of an office suite on the desktop image, particularly given the presence of 'useless' things like planner (I'm paraphrasing from the reviews, not giving my own personal opinion). I know we have good arguments against including an office suite, and I suspect planner is just in there as a hangover from when we tried to include GNOME Office, but there does seem to be a consistent impression in reviews that the current package choice seems bizarre. It's worth at least considering going to 1GB to have LibreOffice, I think, and if we don't, we should drop planner from the desktop spin as well as dropping LibreOffice, to avoid the apparent weirdness of having a planning tool but no other office apps.
Sure, dropping planner is easy. I fear that an attempt to go to 1G at this point will end the same way it did the last time around: nobody has the extra time to oversee this, and ensure that we have a consistent story, all the way from the web page to test days to whatever else is affected. I certainly don't have any time to spare for this...
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Matthias Clasen mclasen@redhat.com wrote:
Sure, dropping planner is easy. I fear that an attempt to go to 1G at this point will end the same way it did the last time around: nobody has the extra time to oversee this, and ensure that we have a consistent story, all the way from the web page to test days to whatever else is affected. I certainly don't have any time to spare for this...
I would like to volunteer to create a desktop image that is 1 GB or so and includes libreoffice by default. I can take care of the necessary details. It need not be the default image for Fedora 15.
Rahul
On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 01:48 +0800, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I would like to volunteer to create a desktop image that is 1 GB or so and includes libreoffice by default. I can take care of the necessary details. It need not be the default image for Fedora 15.
Creating the image itself should be very low overhead.
A while ago, Colin reorganized the spin kickstart files so that we have a fedora-live-desktop.ks file from which the livecd is generated by merely subtracting things that would make it too large (see fedora-livecd-desktop.ks). So, ideally, using fedora-live-desktop.ks should produce the larger image that you want.
But just producing yet another spin variant doesn't solve the problem, really.
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Matthias Clasen mclasen@redhat.com wrote:
Creating the image itself should be very low overhead.
A while ago, Colin reorganized the spin kickstart files so that we have a fedora-live-desktop.ks file from which the livecd is generated by merely subtracting things that would make it too large (see fedora-livecd-desktop.ks). So, ideally, using fedora-live-desktop.ks should produce the larger image that you want.
But just producing yet another spin variant doesn't solve the problem, really.
I don't know how you want to solve the problem or what you consider a problem to solve. You got to start somewhere.
Rahul
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 11:54 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
It didn't happen back then. I think we can get back to 700M with some discipline.
one of the common themes of the F14 review cycle was ridiculing the lack of an office suite on the desktop image, particularly given the presence of 'useless' things like planner (I'm paraphrasing from the reviews, not giving my own personal opinion). I know we have good arguments against including an office suite, and I suspect planner is just in there as a hangover from when we tried to include GNOME Office, but there does seem to be a consistent impression in reviews that the current package choice seems bizarre.
It's all a workaround for the fact that we don't have an application installer...
It's worth at least considering going to 1GB to have LibreOffice, I think, and if we don't, we should drop planner from the desktop spin as well as dropping LibreOffice, to avoid the apparent weirdness of having a planning tool but no other office apps.
I really don't like not having a CD sized image; this has all been discussed in the past on the list.
It's unfortunate conflation that the larger distributable DVD == anaconda OS; removing that conflation would allow us to have a larger image that included openoffice and of course any other popular apps and extensions.
This path would be extending the anaconda live installer to be able to *also* optionally consume RPMs from the DVD image for install, or actually, just default to a regular RPM installation, and duplicate the space between the live image and the included RPMs for the base.
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 12:33 -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 11:54 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
It didn't happen back then. I think we can get back to 700M with some discipline.
one of the common themes of the F14 review cycle was ridiculing the lack of an office suite on the desktop image, particularly given the presence of 'useless' things like planner (I'm paraphrasing from the reviews, not giving my own personal opinion). I know we have good arguments against including an office suite, and I suspect planner is just in there as a hangover from when we tried to include GNOME Office, but there does seem to be a consistent impression in reviews that the current package choice seems bizarre.
It's all a workaround for the fact that we don't have an application installer...
We could have had a half-a-dozen app installers if we weren't off reinventing the wheel every time.
Seriously, if having app selection is so important then use the tools we have. Implementing a simple 'install an office suite' button is utterly trivial and completely available right now.
doing it on the live install is even more trivial with the currently available tools.
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
-sv
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:47 PM, seth vidal skvidal@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 12:33 -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 11:54 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
It didn't happen back then. I think we can get back to 700M with some discipline.
one of the common themes of the F14 review cycle was ridiculing the lack of an office suite on the desktop image, particularly given the presence of 'useless' things like planner (I'm paraphrasing from the reviews, not giving my own personal opinion). I know we have good arguments against including an office suite, and I suspect planner is just in there as a hangover from when we tried to include GNOME Office, but there does seem to be a consistent impression in reviews that the current package choice seems bizarre.
It's all a workaround for the fact that we don't have an application installer...
We could have had a half-a-dozen app installers if we weren't off reinventing the wheel every time.
That's not the problem ... every time someone tries it ends up in endless discussions which in the end result into keeping the status quo.
Seriously, if having app selection is so important then use the tools we have. Implementing a simple 'install an office suite' button is utterly trivial and completely available right now.
A "'install an office suite" button isn't an application installer but well a random button ...
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
We could also just let the people who wants to do the work just do it instead of trying to stop them.
(Sorry for ranting but the application installation story just sucks imo).
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
one of the common themes of the F14 review cycle was ridiculing the lack of an office suite on the desktop image, particularly given the presence of 'useless' things like planner (I'm paraphrasing from the reviews, not giving my own personal opinion). I know we have good arguments against including an office suite, and I suspect planner is just in there as a hangover from when we tried to include GNOME Office, but there does seem to be a consistent impression in reviews that the current package choice seems bizarre.
Weren't those reasons related to lack of space in the LiveCD?
Ubuntu always had openoffice on their live, but I was told they could do it because they did not use our very same upstream (go-oo inteast ooo, again IIRC) and their upstream made it easier to split the suite into finer packaging.
Maybe the whole story is bogus, but having Writer and/or Impress and/or Calc is a must to stand well in reviews, IMHO
On Sat, 2011-01-15 at 10:16 +0100, giallu@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
one of the common themes of the F14 review cycle was ridiculing the lack of an office suite on the desktop image, particularly given the presence of 'useless' things like planner (I'm paraphrasing from the reviews, not giving my own personal opinion). I know we have good arguments against including an office suite, and I suspect planner is just in there as a hangover from when we tried to include GNOME Office, but there does seem to be a consistent impression in reviews that the current package choice seems bizarre.
Weren't those reasons related to lack of space in the LiveCD?
Yes, that's the reason. The thing I saw a lot of people say in reviews is 'well they SAY it's because they don't have the space but then why do they include a useless app like planner?!'. Apparently these people have never heard of an oversight...
--- "giallu@gmail.com" giallu@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
one of the common themes of the F14 review cycle
was ridiculing the lack
of an office suite on the desktop image,
particularly given the presence
of 'useless' things like planner (I'm paraphrasing
from the reviews, not
giving my own personal opinion). I know we have
good arguments against
including an office suite, and I suspect planner
is just in there as a
hangover from when we tried to include GNOME
Office, but there does seem
to be a consistent impression in reviews that the
current package choice
seems bizarre.
Weren't those reasons related to lack of space in the LiveCD?
Ubuntu always had openoffice on their live, but I was told they could do it because they did not use our very same upstream (go-oo inteast ooo, again IIRC) and their upstream made it easier to split the suite into finer packaging.
Maybe the whole story is bogus, but having Writer and/or Impress and/or Calc is a must to stand well in reviews, IMHO
Ridiculing Fedora for not having an office suite on the LiveCD is still a pretty consistent theme, and it is a logical one -- most non-technical users aren't going to run, say, a disc burner from the disk drive their live CD is inserted into, but they certainly are going to web browse and try to write documents or open spreadsheets...
It is difficult enough to showcase Fedora with the stock LiveCD that I've taken to putting custom live USB distros together instead of worrying with the LiveCD at all.
IMHO we could do better by surveying most common-use applications across *all* Linux LiveCD distros and pushing our package selection in whatever direction that leads. Either that, or have a "Common Use" showcase LiveCD spin and an alternate "Vanilla" LiveCD based on whatever we're doing now. If Vanilla winds up becoming an edge-case download we could scrap it in favor of the "Common Use" spin later.
LiveCDs are really best as showcase pieces and its hard to pitch a showcase when you can't demonstrate office suite interoperability. To the average non-gamer a computer is defined by how well it fills the role of linear replacement for: 1- mail boxes, 2- FAX machines, 3- typewriters and 4- filing cabinets (and 5- media centers...). We miss out a lot by not capitalizing on that trend.
The experienced Fedora user has the capacity to expand a system to meet his needs from a mini install via yum alone. My mother, on the other hand, is blown away at the fact that useful software can be installed from the net from within the GUI. Her shock is based on the premise that this can't happen -- an idea reinforced by years of enforced Windows use at work. That indicates the average non-technical user doesn't realize OpenOffice is an option if its not in the LiveCD. That is a powerful argument for inclusion of OpenOffice.
Of course, all of this is assuming that we're concerned with competing with Ubuntu...
Sorry for the long-winded post.
-------------------------------------- Get the new Internet Explorer 8 optimized for Yahoo! JAPAN http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/ie8/
On 1/15/11 8:28 AM, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
Ridiculing Fedora for not having an office suite on the LiveCD is still a pretty consistent theme, and it is a logical one -- most non-technical users aren't going to run, say, a disc burner from the disk drive their live CD is inserted into, but they certainly are going to web browse and try to write documents or open spreadsheets...
This is a bit of a logical fallacy. You say this as if one could remove the CD burning utility and suddenly have room for an office suite. Or as another poster commended as if you could remove planner and suddenly have room for OO.org. It just doesn't work that way. People have tried to make room for OO.o by removing tonnes of stuff, and what you're left with is a CD that is still oversized and has NO applications on it. So if you abandon OO.o you're left with some space to fill up, and yeah, what to fill it with can be a challenge.
On Sat, 2011-01-15 at 08:56 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
People have tried to make room for OO.o by removing tonnes of stuff
The last time I looked into this other distros pulls this off by reducing the amount of installed OOo langpacks until it does fit :-)
I vaguely recall that there was push back against doing this for Fedora.
C.
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Caolán McNamara caolanm@redhat.com wrote:
The last time I looked into this other distros pulls this off by reducing the amount of installed OOo langpacks until it does fit :-)
I vaguely recall that there was push back against doing this for Fedora.
Is it possible to envision some kind of "let's install the langpack only when needed" feature and just stick with english on the LiveCD?
On Sat, 2011-01-15 at 08:56 -0800, Jesse Keating wrote:
On 1/15/11 8:28 AM, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
Ridiculing Fedora for not having an office suite on the LiveCD is still a pretty consistent theme, and it is a logical one -- most non-technical users aren't going to run, say, a disc burner from the disk drive their live CD is inserted into, but they certainly are going to web browse and try to write documents or open spreadsheets...
This is a bit of a logical fallacy. You say this as if one could remove the CD burning utility and suddenly have room for an office suite. Or as another poster commended as if you could remove planner and suddenly have room for OO.org.
Note that I'm not suggesting this, just that we should remove planner *as well as* OpenOffice from the CD-sized ks, because it looks odd to have one but not the other.
In case anyone's wondering, btw, the fact that planner winds up on the CD-sized desktop ISO is more or less a simple oversight. The 'master' fedora-live-desktop.ks adds libreoffice and planner to form a full 'office suite'; the fedora-livecd-desktop.ks , which takes fedora-live-desktop.ks and chops bits off until it's CD-sized, removes libreoffice, but doesn't remove planner. Probably, someone just edited fedora-livecd-desktop.ks to remove libreoffice, ran a spin, saw it was now under 700MB and said 'okay, we're done', without noticing that it'd probably make sense from a neatness perspective to also remove Planner. Removing Planner is really just for neatness and to stop reviewers saying 'why is Planner in there but not any other office app'.
--- Jesse Keating jkeating@j2solutions.net wrote:
On 1/15/11 8:28 AM, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
Ridiculing Fedora for not having an office suite
on the
LiveCD is still a pretty consistent theme, and it
is a
logical one -- most non-technical users aren't
going to
run, say, a disc burner from the disk drive their
live CD
is inserted into, but they certainly are going to
web
browse and try to write documents or open
spreadsheets...
This is a bit of a logical fallacy. You say this as if one could remove the CD burning utility and suddenly have room for an office suite. Or as another poster commended as if you could remove planner and suddenly have room for OO.org. It just doesn't work that way. People have tried to make room for OO.o by removing tonnes of stuff, and what you're left with is a CD that is still oversized and has NO applications on it. So if you abandon OO.o you're left with some space to fill up, and yeah, what to fill it with can be a challenge.
What I'm saying is LiveCDs are most effective as a distro demonstration tool, and one of the most important areas to demonstrate is the presence of a functioning office suite.
As far as disc burning, having a disc burning utility included in the LiveCD spin is a little silly since most PCs and notebooks have one disk drive, and most folks aren't thinking about burning a disk when the single drive they own is occupied by a LiveCD distro.
This is considering the majority of demonstration cases. The technically savvy, old Unix hands and long-time Fedora users are not who I am concerned with impressing -- the technical merits of Fedora stand on their own within that group, and members of that group have other means than the LiveCD to install from anyway. So it may be useful to consider the utility of the LiveCD as a LiveCD, and not primarily as an installation medium.
Regardless the history of Fedora's LiveCD being with or without an office distro, the present reality is that all other serious LiveCD distros do include an office suite and Fedora does not. This puts Fedora at a serious marketing disadvantage relative to Gentoo, Puppy or (especially) Ubuntu.
-------------------------------------- Get the new Internet Explorer 8 optimized for Yahoo! JAPAN http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/ie8/
We may pick up some more headroom this release as it looks like the xz (lzma2) patches for squashfs support are actually going to land for 2.6.38. I expect this to free up 50-70 MB on CD sized images.
On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 01:28 +0900, 夜神 岩男 wrote:
It is difficult enough to showcase Fedora with the stock LiveCD that I've taken to putting custom live USB distros together instead of worrying with the LiveCD at all.
just for info, you don't have to do a custom spin, you can simply do a build of the fedora-live-desktop.ks spin which is in spin-kickstarts and you should get more or less what you want. fedora-live-desktop.ks defines a sort of ideal desktop live spin which turns out to be rather over 700MB in size, then what we ship is actually a build from fedora-livecd-desktop.ks , which just takes fedora-live-desktop.ks and chops bits off until it's small enough. So we actually already more or less *have* both an 'ideal', over-CD-size spin and a small, CD-size spin, but we only actually build and ship one of them at release time.
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.comwrote:
On. So we actually already more or less *have* both an 'ideal', over-CD-size spin and a small, CD-size spin, but we only actually build and ship one of them at release time.
... which is why I was suggesting (and volunteering) that we do both for Fedora 15 and make some progress instead of continuously compromising on the user experience to save space.
Rahul
On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 02:53 +0800, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote: On. So we actually already more or less *have* both an 'ideal', over-CD-size spin and a small, CD-size spin, but we only actually build and ship one of them at release time.
... which is why I was suggesting (and volunteering) that we do both for Fedora 15 and make some progress instead of continuously compromising on the user experience to save space.
Yeah, I think that's a reasonable suggestion too. It'd be interesting to see the download stats for them. It's one more spin to build and QA, but it may be worth it.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Matthias Clasen mclasen@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 13:43 +0000, Adam Williamson wrote:
Hi, all. Just wondering if changes to comps for F15 (GNOME 3) have been considered already. It'd be good to have any necessary changes made ASAP so that nightlies start to resemble what F15 final will look like, as much as possible.
For a start it seems sensible to make gnome-shell mandatory, and maybe gnome-panel would be default rather than mandatory. Per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658605 , we'll also need gnome-themes-standard to be installed by default, and I'm not sure anything currently causes that; though adding it to comps may not be the best approach, as that won't fix updates.
Are there any other necessary changes?
I've made a first pass over comps and the spin kickstart files. Some things I've made:
- replace gnome-themes by gnome-themes-standard, as you've noticed
- don't include librsvg3 (which had only a very brief existence)
why was a lib ever explicitly included anyway. They should all be pulled in by deps so you just list the core apps and deps get pulled in as required.
- update our exclusions to exclude libreoffice instead of ooo
After these changes, I end up with a 730M desktop spin, even without rhythmbox.
As far as further necessary changes, I see at least the following:
finish packaging cantarell fonts, and include them
smoke out perl dependencies again
Oh, its back again. It just won't go away :-/ I'll have another look, it was on my todo list.
Peter
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 16:35 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Matthias Clasen mclasen@redhat.com wrote:
<snip>
- replace gnome-themes by gnome-themes-standard, as you've noticed
- don't include librsvg3 (which had only a very brief existence)
why was a lib ever explicitly included anyway. They should all be pulled in by deps so you just list the core apps and deps get pulled in as required.
So that the SVG loader for gdk-pixbuf-3.0 (which was in GTK+ 3.0 packages) was dragged in. gdk-pixbuf is now independent and there's no need to version it (for now).
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 16:35 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
- don't include librsvg3 (which had only a very brief existence)
why was a lib ever explicitly included anyway. They should all be pulled in by deps so you just list the core apps and deps get pulled in as required.
It was included since it provides a gdk-pixbuf loader, and we didn't want to depend on random dependencies for pulling it in.
- smoke out perl dependencies again
Oh, its back again. It just won't go away :-/ I'll have another look, it was on my todo list.
It was some hplip thing, twaugh is on it.
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Adam Williamson -
Bastien Nocera -
Bruno Wolff III -
Caolán McNamara -
Colin Walters -
drago01 -
Gianluca Sforna -
Jesse Keating -
Matthias Clasen -
Peter Robinson -
Rahul Sundaram -
Seth Vidal -
夜神 岩男