| Summary: | www-client/chromium: remove gconf support | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Pacho Ramos <pacho> |
| Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Chromium Project <chromium> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | leio |
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
|
Description
Pacho Ramos
2016-03-07 15:51:14 UTC
I wanted to report this bug also. Arch got rid of this a year ago. Apparently there is no bigger secret to this than putting this into the build: -Duse_gconf=0 I would even advise against "gconf" USE flag, since gconf is *deprecated* technology. This bug fixed would be really great. Yeah, my aim was also to kill gconf support completely ;) And we would probably have to kill the pulseaudio dependency on gconf too. Arch Linux simply uses: -Duse_gconf=0 Why can't we at least utilize the gconf USE flag to do that conditionally? We already make gconf optional via the gnome use flag. Not really, because gnome flag influences this also: # Install GNOME default application entry (bug #303100). if use gnome; then insinto /usr/share/gnome-control-center/default-apps newins "${FILESDIR}"/chromium-browser.xml chromium-browser.xml fi Look, we have gconf use flag already, why not simply use that? Same applies to the pulseaudio package. Could this be done someday? (In reply to Rok Kralj from comment #7) > Not really, because gnome flag influences this also: > > # Install GNOME default application entry (bug #303100). > if use gnome; then > insinto /usr/share/gnome-control-center/default-apps > newins "${FILESDIR}"/chromium-browser.xml chromium-browser.xml > fi I have never really questioned that code, but it makes no sense to install that file only when the gnome USE flag is set. We should install it unconditionally. > Look, we have gconf use flag already, why not simply use that? I will plan to rename the gnome USE flag to gconf on the next version bump. > Same applies to the pulseaudio package. Could this be done someday? You'll need to consult the maintainer of the pulseaudio package about that. yes, it appears to date back to 2010. I am really looking forward to the next release. Thanks for the work you do. https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=8c88f0cf22a0d8915df6d06f59b020cbfc671e2e commit 8c88f0cf22a0d8915df6d06f59b020cbfc671e2e Author: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> Date: Sat Jan 7 12:41:12 2017 -0500 www-client/chromium: rename gnome USE flag to gconf Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/576712 Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.3_p19, Repoman-2.3.1_p12 www-client/chromium/chromium-57.0.2970.0.ebuild | 12 +++++------- www-client/chromium/metadata.xml | 1 + 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) doesn't the code try GSettings from GIO first anyways, so this is some corner case fallback that won't be used even with USE=gconf here? Also, gconf provides a GSettings backend, for those that really desire it over dconf for some weird reason. Also, you won't actually find the global configuration settings it's probably trying to find via gconf (desktop proxy settings, etc), those would be in dconf via GSettings - pretty sure even with MATE. (In reply to Mike Gilbert from comment #8) > I have never really questioned that code, but it makes no sense to install > that file only when the gnome USE flag is set. We should install it > unconditionally. Wouldn't it make sense to install that file only if GNOME is really installed (use flag or has_Version checks e.g.)? (In reply to Steffen Hau from comment #12) > Wouldn't it make sense to install that file only if GNOME is really > installed (use flag or has_Version checks e.g.)? Nope, I don't think so. (In reply to Mike Gilbert from comment #13) > (In reply to Steffen Hau from comment #12) > > Wouldn't it make sense to install that file only if GNOME is really > > installed (use flag or has_Version checks e.g.)? > > Nope, I don't think so. To expand on that, I don't think it makes sense to conditionally install a 1 K text file. There's really no downside to having it installed: if you don't use GNOME, it just sits there occupying a single inode on your disk. As I do not have a folder named /usr/share/gnome-control-center/, it would be 2 inodes :) Of course you are right considering inodes and occupied space, but personally, I don't like files/folders installed (in this case even not belonging to the source tarball of the package) which are specific for a DE and would be simply configurable by using use flags (as it was done before this change). phajdan.jr: Do you want to proceed with removing gconf support altogether, or would you prefer to keep the USE flag around? Personally, I don't see a good reason to keep it. If it turns out that someone is relying on it somehow, we can add it back fairly easily. I suggest you keep it around for as long as it is present upstream. It should be off by default, of course. The point is that if I remember it right from when I read the code, there's actually no situation really where this gconf codepath is ever used, unless the user has kept around GNOME2 on their system or something. Mask it then. Removal is fine too, I am just happy this is done. Maybe even remove the gconf flag completely. It has been deprecated for a quite few years now. I would remove it completely, except for the case someone explains why he/she really needs that support (and migrating a setup from gnome2 at this time doesn't fit into that from my point of view) https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=2acf5d231f30e7fa82fb7fb88cf99f8bd6e4f2db commit 2acf5d231f30e7fa82fb7fb88cf99f8bd6e4f2db Author: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> Date: Thu May 18 17:29:21 2017 -0400 www-client/chromium: drop gconf USE flag Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/576712 Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.5_p32, Repoman-2.3.2_p62 www-client/chromium/chromium-60.0.3100.0.ebuild | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) |