chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
I'm not talking about selectively disabling cups. My proposal is
to no longer enable the cups useflag in the base profile. I don't
think cups should be part of the base profile, and as a result
cascading to the desktop profile. And a lot of people seem to
agree. Users can always enable that functionality when they
need it. It is not something that is necessary for running a
desktop system.

Cheers,

I agree that CUPS is not really necessary in the desktop profile, and
especially in the base profile.  Many systems run desktop
environments without needing printing support.  As we advance further
toward a paperless computing experience, the need for printing
support becomes even less.  And, as it is incredibly simple to add
print capabilities by placing the cups USE flag in /etc/make.conf,
that choice should be left to the user.

Regards,
Nathan Zachary
One could argue the opposite as well.  Adding -cups to make.conf is
just as easy.

I'm one of those lowly users.

Dale

:-)  :-)

I think that the point is that it is better to have it disabled by
default so that new users do not run into these circular dependencies
upon their first installation.  They can then add cups to their
make.conf and emerge -avuDN world to get full printing support.

Just as a sidebar, there is not a "lowly user."  Your input is greatly
important in all matters regarding Gentoo as you are a member of the
userbase.  It's your operating system too! :)

Regards,
Nathan Zachary


Let just think of it this way. I have to reinstall say from a dead hard drive. I have copies of my make.conf and world file. I install my new drive, download the tarball and unpack it. I copy over make.conf and world. Naturally cups will be enabled. Then I sync and start to update. Isn't that circular dependency still going to be there? After all, this is how I install Gentoo even if from scratch. I set my USE line before I start to emerge or update.

It seems to me, in my situation, this would not solve much. Maybe I am incorrect in that.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Reply via email to