A server PHP application needs ImageMagick for image manipulation stuff. When I say "yum install ImageMagick" I get quite a long list of desktop related packages... 77 packages (37M) - there's even esound and alsa-lib on the list (installing a graphics package causes sound packages to be installed). That happens because librsvg2 (which ImageMagick requires) wants to install gnome-vfs2 (GNOME related libraries). I don't think a generic library, which isn't a GNOME library, should require GNOME libraries. Now that it does, a server ends up having desktop - and even sound - packages. This seems not to be just a simple SPEC file issue because I can see that librsvg2 is linked against libgnomevfs-2.so.0. Though I wonder why? Is that correct - that a generic library links against GNOME? In Fedora 9 librsvg2 (librsvg2-2.22.2-1.fc9) is not linked against libgnomevfs-2.so.0 anymore and doesn't say it requires gnome-vfs2. This has changed somewhere after librsvg2-2.18.2-2.fc8 (which still requires gnome-vfs2). Could the change be backported to the version of librsvg2 (currently librsvg2-2.16.1-1.el5) in el5? It would be nice because now we get unnecessary desktop/sound packages when installing librsvg2. Thanks.
Oh sorry, I made a duplicate. Closing this one... I wonder what actually has changed in the Fedora 9 version of librsvg2 because the SPEC file there does have --enable-gnome-vfs and still that version doesn't require libgnomevfs-2.so.0. The line "gnome-vfs2 >= %{gnome_vfs_version}" is gone though. Perhaps the newer version doesn't use libgnomevfs-2.so.0 anymore at all... Oh, I can't close this bug: "You tried to change the Status field from NEW to CLOSED , but only a user with the required permissions may change that field." So I had to leave this as NEW.
This bug/component is not included in scope for RHEL-5.11.0 which is the last RHEL5 minor release. This Bugzilla will soon be CLOSED as WONTFIX (at the end of RHEL5.11 development phase (Apr 22, 2014)). Please contact your account manager or support representative in case you need to escalate this bug.
This bug is a duplicate of bug 231531.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 231531 ***