further package removals/potential package removals

[Florian La Roche]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 11:52:24AM +0100, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 05:31 +0100, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> > Yes, the stupid kernel packaging which brings 30 MB of bloat into / is a
> > problem also. But nevertheless, the deps should be cut. A candidate would
> > be 'pam' which brings 'glib2' in, or all the packages with 'Requires:
> > kernel>=2.6' which should be either removed or rewritten to 'Conflicts:
> > kernel<2.6'.

For the kernel requires you should file bz requests, glib2 looks small
enough to not worry about it IMNSHO. (Just like we don't make pam optional
or similar things. ;-)

greetings,

Florian La Roche

> 
> The problem is pam_console (and maybe others) modules (which are by
> default configured to be used) require glib2. And I don't see any
> possibility to make the pam_console optional. So you can tune your
> minimum install so the pam_console is removed from all /etc/pam.d/...
> configs and then you can remove glib2. Or you can write a patch for all
> pam modules in redhat which use glib2 which replace the functionality
> provided by glib2 by another means and if it's good it will be applied.
> But I won't write it as I have many more useful things to do.
> 
> -- 
> Tomas Mraz <tmraz at redhat.com>
> 
> -- 
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list