On 16 January 2015 at 22:57, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>
> Your email is very confusing; did you forget to send a part of it?
>
No. Apologies for the confusion. What was confusing?
> Users won't care about any difference, and honestly no matter which
> language they're written in they are unl
2015-01-16 23:46 GMT+01:00 Reuben Thomas :
> On 16 January 2015 at 22:44, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
>>
>> xdg-utils does not depend on perl; all the tools are in shell. You
>> should talk to your distro.
>
>
> If you read back to the beginning of my thread, you'll see my suggestion to
> use Perl. In
On 16 January 2015 at 22:44, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> xdg-utils does not depend on perl; all the tools are in shell. You
> should talk to your distro.
>
If you read back to the beginning of my thread, you'll see my suggestion
to use Perl. Indeed, currently xdg-utils does not.
xdg-utils does not depend on perl; all the tools are in shell. You
should talk to your distro.
J. Leclanche
2015-01-16 22:11 GMT+01:00 Steven Stewart-Gallus
:
> Hello.
>
> I'm just some random guy but anyways.
>
> As a user and administrator, I dislike excess dependencies on my
> system such as P
Hello.
I'm just some random guy but anyways.
As a user and administrator, I dislike excess dependencies on my
system such as Perl but can always just remove the xdg-utils package
if I really want to, so having xdg-utils depend on Perl isn't that bad
a thing.
As a programmer, I don't think C is t
On 16 January 2015 at 21:11, Steven Stewart-Gallus <
sstewartgallu...@mylangara.bc.ca> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I'm just some random guy but anyways.
>
Thanks for commenting!
> As a user and administrator, I dislike excess dependencies on my
> system such as Perl but can always just remove the xdg
