server utils that drag in desktop dependencies

[Chris Snook]

Curtis Doty wrote:
> Doing some server benchmarking today on f10. And gnuplot has somehow 
> acquired *way* to many unnecessary deps.
> 
> # yum -d1 install gnuplot
> 
> ==============================================================
>   Package                Arch   Version           Repository
>                                                           Size
> ==============================================================
> Installing:
>   gnuplot                x86_64 4.2.3-1.fc10      fedora 2.2 M
> Installing for dependencies:
>   GConf2                 x86_64 2.24.0-1.fc10     fedora 1.7 M
>   ORBit2                 x86_64 2.14.16-1.fc10    fedora 196 k
>   PolicyKit              x86_64 0.9-3.fc10        fedora 173 k
>   SDL                    x86_64 1.2.13-6.fc10     fedora 210 k
>   alsa-lib               x86_64 1.0.18-6.rc3.fc10 fedora 418 k
>   atk                    x86_64 1.24.0-1.fc10     fedora 216 k
>   cdparanoia-libs        x86_64 10.2-2.fc10       fedora  53 k
>   cups-libs              x86_64 1:1.3.9-2.fc10    fedora 199 k
>   gd                     x86_64 2.0.35-6.fc10     fedora 151 k
>   gstreamer              x86_64 0.10.21-2.fc10    fedora 789 k
>   gstreamer-plugins-base x86_64 0.10.21-2.fc10    fedora 990 k
>   gstreamer-tools        x86_64 0.10.21-2.fc10    fedora  20 k
>   gtk2                   x86_64 2.14.4-3.fc10     fedora 4.3 M
>   hicolor-icon-theme     noarch 0.10-4            fedora  39 k
>   jasper-libs            x86_64 1.900.1-8.fc9     fedora 153 k
>   libICE                 x86_64 1.0.4-4.fc10      fedora  54 k
>   libIDL                 x86_64 0.8.11-1.fc10     fedora  93 k
>   libSM                  x86_64 1.1.0-2.fc10      fedora  26 k
>   libXcomposite          x86_64 0.4.0-5.fc10      fedora  14 k
>   libXcursor             x86_64 1.1.9-3.fc10      fedora  29 k
>   libXdamage             x86_64 1.1.1-4.fc9       fedora  11 k
>   libXfixes              x86_64 4.0.3-4.fc10      fedora  15 k
>   libXi                  x86_64 1.1.3-4.fc9       fedora  29 k
>   libXinerama            x86_64 1.0.3-2.fc10      fedora  13 k
>   libXpm                 x86_64 3.5.7-4.fc9       fedora  57 k
>   libXrandr              x86_64 1.2.3-1.fc10      fedora  26 k
>   libXv                  x86_64 1.0.4-1.fc10      fedora  20 k
>   libjpeg                x86_64 6b-43.fc10        fedora 143 k
>   libogg                 x86_64 2:1.1.3-9.fc9     fedora  19 k
>   liboil                 x86_64 0.3.14-1.fc9      fedora 148 k
>   libtheora              x86_64 1.0rc1-2.fc10     fedora 190 k
>   libtiff                x86_64 3.8.2-11.fc10     fedora 317 k
>   libvisual              x86_64 0.4.0-6.fc9       fedora 152 k
>   libvorbis              x86_64 1:1.2.0-5.fc10    fedora 212 k
>   wxBase                 x86_64 2.8.9-1.fc10      fedora 673 k
>   wxGTK                  x86_64 2.8.9-1.fc10      fedora 3.8 M
> 
> Transaction Summary
> ==============================================================
> Install     37 Package(s)
> Update       0 Package(s)
> Remove       0 Package(s)
> 
> Total download size: 18 M
> Is this ok [y/N]: n
> Exiting on user Command
> 
> In this case, the server admin already has the desired base libX11 and 
> libpng stuff. So only the jpeg and related imaging libs are probably 
> reasonable. But definitely *not* the multimedia and various UI elements.

None of the direct dependencies in that dependency tree are 
unreasonable.  There are three ways to make them go away:

a)	Disable the GUI bits in gnuplot at build time, and remove the 
requisite dependencies.  This will piss off anyone who actually uses 
those features.

b)	Create gnuplot-cli and gnuplot-gui packages that conflict with each 
other.  This will piss off lots of people.

c)	Make gnuplot smart enough to tell at runtime whether or not the GUI 
bits are installed, and properly handle the case where someone asks for 
them but they're not there.  Abstract the GUI calls into a gnuplot-gui 
package, which has most of the dependencies.  Upstream won't care to do 
this themselves, but they'll probably take the patch if you write it 
yourself, it's clean, and it's completely bug-free.

Personally, I think there's lower-hanging fruit.

-- Chris