Gdm removed when sugar WM removed

Marko Vojinovic vvmarko at
Sun Oct 23 19:55:23 UTC 2011

On Sunday 23 October 2011 19:17:54 Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 10/23/2011 07:20 AM, antonio montagnani wrote:
> > A simple solution would be not disinstall GDM by default in any WM group
> > disinstallation: I guess that many people want to try different WM's and
> > in case they decided to disinstall some WM, their GDM would be killed,
> > that is not fair. How about this simple decision, i.e. not to include
> > GDM in any disinstallation list??
> In general, when you remove a package you also remove its dependencies
> if and only if nothing else needs them.  As long as you have a WM
> installed that needs gdm, it shouldn't be removed.  Sounds like a bug to
> me.  Report it.

How do you determine whether or not a given wm needs gdm? Any wm can equally 
well use kdm instead of gdm, so it is actually a conditional dependency --- 
"if there is no other dm installed, and if there is some wm which depends on 
the presence of a dm, don't uninstall it".

It's a mess, if you ask me. :-) Multiple wm's and de's, "maybe depending" on 
multiple dm's that may or may not be present...

Best, :-)

More information about the users mailing list