From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Racket: Move DrRacket to a separate output? Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 10:49:06 +0200 Message-ID: <87pnxgjwfx.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87efdx6nzt.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46926) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g0jn5-00053P-Gt for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 04:49:28 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g0jn4-0005oN-MW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 04:49:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87efdx6nzt.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> (Pierre Neidhardt's message of "Fri, 14 Sep 2018 00:17:42 +0200") 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: Pierre Neidhardt Cc: guix-devel Hello Pierre, Pierre Neidhardt skribis: > Wouldn't it make sense to move DrRacket to a separate output? I take > that most advanced users use something else (who said Emacs?) and > DrRacket might eat up a decent amount of disk space + extra dependencies > by itself. I don=E2=80=99t think it=E2=80=99s a matter of being an =E2=80=9Cadvanced= =E2=80=9D user or not (DrRacket is really impressive, with a macro stepper and all sorts of bells and whistles), but I agree with the rationale. :-) > Arch Linux provides racket and racket-minimal: the latter is stripped > from DrRacket: > > https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?q=3Dracket Such a split sounds good to me. What do Chris and other Racketeers think? Cheers, Ludo=E2=80=99.