Return-Path: Subject: Re: [Bluez-devel] [Pkg-bluetooth-maintainers] dbus dependency introduces unwanted X11 dependency From: Bram Stolk To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: BlueZ development , pkg-bluetooth-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org In-Reply-To: <1167070266.11510.27.camel@violet> References: <1167052771.5265.7.camel@suske> <20061225165542.GA970@esaurito.net> <1167066856.11510.22.camel@violet> <1167069204.5265.35.camel@suske> <1167070266.11510.27.camel@violet> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 19:30:06 +0100 Message-Id: <1167071406.5265.54.camel@suske> Mime-Version: 1.0 List-ID: On Mon, 2006-12-25 at 19:11 +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Bram, > > > > the bluez-utils depends on a working D-Bus system bus. It has no > > > dependency on X or anything else (besides the Bluetooth library). So if > > > it pulls in X related stuff then this is a fault of D-Bus or its package > > > and not a problem within the bluez-utils package. > > > > I'll take this up with the dbus maintainer then. > > > > I still think that there is no need for X11 client stuff if you > > want to run a PAN daemon. Bluetooth communication has nothing to > > do with graphics devices. The 2.x version of bluez-utils demonstrated > > it can do without. > > you still don't understand it. BlueZ is _not_ using any X functionality With all due respect: I think it is you who does not understand (or not read). In my very first mail I wrote: "And with dbus, X11 is introduced." I was, and still am, perfectly aware that the x11 dep comes from dbus, not from bluez-utils directly. It is literally what I wrote in my mail. Pleas re-read. That is why I asked whether libdbus would be enough. As it turned out that libdbus is not enough, I will take this up with the 'dbus' people. My guess is that dbus-launch could be split from the rest of dbus, to avoid bringing in X11 if you want to do PAN. > in its daemons. We never have and we never will be. Period. However we > use D-Bus as general communication method and that is a hard dependency > now and it won't change in the future. So if you wanna use something > that doesn't use D-Bus then stick to the 2.x releases. There was a > reason why we changed the major version number. Ok, fine. It's just that when you compare dependencies between 2.x and 3.x, it is *not* that the communication method changed: libdbus was a dependency for both versions. I do not think that you realized this. Thank you for your input, Bram > Regards > > Marcel > >