Pjotr wrote: ⤴Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:23 pm
If a package, any package, is pulled because of a dependency, you can safely assume that it has its use. Regardless of its (terse) description, which may leave some uses unmentioned. Otherwise it wouldn't have been labelled as dependency.
As it's only 65 kB, I fail to see the problem or the need to make a fuss about it.
mate-common provides 2 executables, and this is from the man page of each executable:
- mate-autogen: generates all makefiles for MATE packages
- mate-doc-common: used by mate-autogen to include the standard user documentation build files in a MATE package
Okay, maybe it's just me, but I don't think those 2 executables are needed by a normal user. I would appreciate it if someone could explain to me otherwise, though... I understand that some packages sometimes have their own purpose, like for example gcc-10-base, which don't actually provide anything and yet they are listed as a dependency. I somehow fail to see how a user would need mate-common, that's all.
If someone could just point me to the right github repo which generates this package, I would like to make a PR. I guess I should have made this clear from the start, that I would like to contribute and correct a possible packaging error, not ask others to do the work. It looks like a trivial low-hanging fruit that I can contribute on.
I get that people are tired from seeing whiny users who demand developers to do their personal bidding, while providing tersely written bug reports (if it can be called a bug report at all). I'm not that kind of user, and I hope you don't see me as one