Re: window managers duplicating functions of GNOME

[famrom idecnet com (Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero)]

>> > Are there any Enlightenment (rpms) that should be left on the machine to
>> > support some gnome function?
>> NO.
>> GNOME and Enlightenment are independent.
>Well. Um. I don't know whether this still holds true, given that
>someone was mentioning a dependency on "windowmanager" rather than
>any one window manager in particular. But in the past, whilst upgrading
>or installing GNOME onto a machine, I have met dependencies about
>requiring enlightenment. I think that was only installing, but I 

IIRC it was forced by RH RPMs (you can use any windowmanager, but the
packager forced e, instead of the right solution), in other distros you
could choose any wm that provided "gnome-wm" (the right solution).

>can't be sure. I do remember more than once putting enlightenment
>on, then all the GNOME stuff, then removing enlightenment. And I

To erase a thing required by others you have to force it, no?

>don't _install_ very much: I just keep upgrading and upgrading 
>things. So I have the impression it might have been required for
>upgrades at one stage. 

Maybe latest RPMs have removed that dependency.

>Certainly on older rpm-based systems (dunno about Debian, Slack,
>or *BSD) you needed enlightenment present to install GNOME. You 
>could, however, safely remove it then. But whether you have to
>put it back on to upgrade sometimes now, I don't know. 

That is. Or force installation of new software.

GSR