Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 13:23:35 +0100 From: Michal Varga <varga.michal@gmail.com> To: Rick <lists.rick@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gnome2-lite and epiphany Message-ID: <1290860615.1478.15.camel@xenon> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin61_K2rAbkK%2Bv6kXN4KCBW%2BMAS7dsGL3BT5pez@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTin61_K2rAbkK%2Bv6kXN4KCBW%2BMAS7dsGL3BT5pez@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2010-11-25 at 09:55 -0500, Rick wrote: > I wonder why epiphany is included in the gnome2-lite meta-port. Because it's the cleanest, lightest and bestest web browser ever created (well at least since Galeon died). > With dependencies, it takes a long time to build, You mean one dependency - webkit, which is nowadays considered THE killer web engine of the decade, quickly replacing Gecko wherever possible. Now if you were arguing for removal of yelp with its horrible dependency on that security nightmare called libxul[runner], that would be an entirely different case. > and I doubt many people use it. Within the circle of my close friends, I know 1 (that is - one, but let's say two, as I don't tend to check such things regularly) person that doesn't use epiphany. Where does that put me? > I noticed that neither fedora nor ubuntu include epiphany in > the install. In opposite to 50 other linux distributions that do. > If most people agree, could epiphany be removed from > gnome2-lite? No. (should I start collecting signatures, just in case?) m. -- Michal Varga, Stonehenge (Gmail account)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1290860615.1478.15.camel>