Description of problem: Lots of new things needed by libreoffice: gvfs-smb libsmbclient gvfs samba-libs samba-common pytalloc libldb libtevent libbluray libudisks2 udisks2 libatasmart ntfsprogs dosfstools gdisk mdadm xfsprogs I see the update text mentions better samba support (fine), but why is libbluray necessary here? xfsprogs? dosfstools? mdadm? gdisk? None of that stuff makes any sense. Unfortunately, dnf is loathe to tell me *why* something is being dragged in :( . Looking at git, it seems gvfs-smb is the real culprit here; feel free to reassign, but I'll leave it here for anyone else who comes along looking for this problem (I know there's more than just me ;) ). Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 4.2.6.3-7.fc20
caolanm->sbergman: no good deed goes unpunished.
Various libreoffice* packages now requiring gvfs-smb is due to the fix for bug 1054952. Using rpm --whatrequires to sort out the above list I get (on F20): gvfs-smb libsmbclient <- gvfs_smb gvfs <- gvfs_smb samba-libs <- libsmbclient samba-common <- libsmbclient pytalloc <- samba_libs libldb <- samba_libs libtevent <- samba_libs libbluray <- gvfs_smb libudisks2 <- gvfs udisks2 <- gvfs libatasmart <- udisks2 ntfsprogs <- udisks2 dosfstools <- udisks2 gdisk <- udisks2 mdadm <- udisks2 xfsprogs <- udisks2 So udisks2 is one of the main "culprits" here, but given that it is required by both gvfs and kdelibs, I'd assume it is already installed anyway at least on KDE and GNOME desktops? @Ondrej: Anything obvious that could be cut from the list of gvfs-smb requirements?
I wonder why gvfs-smb requires libbluray, have to investigate it further. However other looks good, GVfs needs udisks, because of volume monitor...
Hmm libbluray is needed by statically linked common parts, so we can't cut it out. It would be possible to cut it out from gvfs-smb, but still it has to be as a dependecy for gvfs...
This issue has become moot insofar as libreoffice* packages will no longer depend on gvfs-smb starting libreoffice-4.2.6.3-8.fc20, see bug 1054952 comment 30.