Re: graphics/lcms not quite removal proposal, graphics/gqview-devel removal proposal

[Andrew Randrianasulu <randrianasulu%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 3:41 PM Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
>
> Andrew Randrianasulu <randrianasulu%gmail.com@localhost> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 2:49 PM Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
> >>
> >> Andrew Randrianasulu <randrianasulu%gmail.com@localhost> writes:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, Mar 8, 2026 at 6:49 PM Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Andrew Randrianasulu <randrianasulu%gmail.com@localhost> writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> > вс, 8 мар. 2026 г., 16:42 Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>   The gqview-devel distfile is from 2006 and all the cool kids have long
> >> >> >>   since moved to geeqie.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > And geeqie moved to gtk3 (quite heavy to build from scratch on underpowered
> >> >> > arches).
> >> >>
> >> >> Super underpowered for gtk3; at least it's not in rust.   Are you saying
> >> >> gtk3 takes more than 12h to build on some computer you actually use?
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't know how to interpret your reply.  Are you saying that you
> >> >> personally have gqview-devel installed and use it?
> >> >
> >> > I tried it (geeqie) on qemu-system-sparc and it died trying to rebuild
> >> > gcc10. It was loooong wait.....
> >>
> >> You have declined to answer the question, so will assume you are not
> >> actually using gqview-devel.
> >
> >
> > Correct. I am used to Linux where -devel package is for developer's
> > files like headers and static libs.
> >
> > In this case I guess name means that this version of gqview was not
> > from last release, but from some time after.
>
> pkgsrc isn't GNU/Linux :-) and the -devel suffix has ~always meant
> interim versions not declared as releases.  We have tended to label
> these -snapshot when they're just a git commit, vs when they are
> releases in an unstable series, not intended for general use.
>
> It's fairly common for an abandoned project to end up with foo-devel as
> the best version to use in pkgsrc, when there's been work after the last
> release.
>
> In this case, the DESCR for gqview-devel is clear:
>
>   This package is the unstable version of gqview.
>   gqview is obsolete, and has been replaced by a fork, geeqie.
>
> > But honestly, this kind of _altitude_ beat any desire to help here out of me.
>
> It's not attitude.  I was reaching the point where asking a specific
> question again seemed unlikely to produce a useful result, so I decided
> to stop trying, because it wastes everyone else's time.
>
> The point of removal proposals is that there is a belief that there are
> zero or very few actual users.  Thus the question is *if there is a
> user*, not if someone out there thinks that it is possible that someone
> else might want to use it.  I asked if there were users; you spoke up
> without being clear, I asked you if you are using it, and you again
> commented about something that is actually off topic (geeqie), without
> answering the question.  It was remarkably hard to get a straight answer
> about a very simple question.
>
> The help I was looking for was solely checking if my guess that there
> are zero users was wrong.

If book in library has zero users recently - should library just drop
said book? (yes I know they do, I just dislike this)