From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roel Janssen Subject: Re: texmaker, Qt and Chromium Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2016 23:35:53 +0200 Message-ID: <87oa2u8r1t.fsf@gnu.org> References: <877f9kufxx.fsf@elephly.net> <871szrurco.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35124) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bszJ7-00080P-9Q for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2016 17:37:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bszJ1-00021g-AJ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Oct 2016 17:37:24 -0400 In-reply-to: <871szrurco.fsf@elephly.net> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel Ricardo Wurmus writes: > David Craven writes: > >>> What do you think? The alternative is to drop Texmaker and all the >>> other packages that depend on Chromium as distributed by Qt. >> >> Weren't you vocal on IRC about bundling and the hell it brings? Sounds >> like bundling is ok when it suits you... :) > > I have no problems dropping Texmaker. I’m not even using it. Ouch. I was the one who submitted the package when the Qt modules weren't unbundled yet (I guess). Now, because of a change of how we package Qt, we're ready to remove a program that used to work just fine..? What's next? Throw the calibre package out of the window too because it's broken for GNU Guix users? Kind regards, Roel Janssen