further package removals/potential package removals

[Havoc Pennington]

On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 06:16 -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> Seriously, dependencies have a context, and it's highly unlikely
> that the dependency is actually needed by anaconda to install
> or remove nautilus. The hint to depsolvers like anaconda necessary
> with current implementations to discover an additional edge in
> the dependency tree graph could be handled in other ways,
> if nautilus were prepared to deal with the dlopen failure at
> run-time.

nautilus does not require the SMB backend to work, however
we do want it installed by default (even on upgrade).

If (as it does now) that means some people have to 
keep it installed even though they don't want it,
then too bad; it's simply more important to get it
installed by default.

If someone fixes it so there's no tradeoff (we can 
get it by default, *and* you can uninstall it), 
then fantastic; of course nobody will object.

A "requires(missingok)" sounds fine to me, but 
the anaconda guys are the ones whose opinion
counts.

Havoc