Interesting you mention Gentoo. That's in fact what I was going to
mention as well. Binary distributions often have compile-time support
choices that force library dependencies if enabled. It was apparently
judged worthwhile to enable bluetooth support for those that had it, even
at the cost of forcing the library dependency. The option would be
disabling bluetooth support even for those that needed it.
This is the kind of choices binary distributions make all the time. Among
other things, it's why most binary distributions favor one desktop
environment (KDE, GNOME, XFCE, whatever) over another, even if they have
binaries for both. Inevitably there will be packages with compile-time
enabled options to better integrate with more than one, and a binary
distribution will, by working policy borne of necessity, tend to enable
the support for their "default" desktop while disabling the other, thus
not forcing the installation of their non-default desktops, while forcing
the installation of at least major components of their default choice due
to the build-time linking they enabled.
The only way around this sort of thing for a binary distro is shipping
multiple choices, either as different distribution flavors,
ubuntu/kubuntu, etc, or by shipping multiple versions of the same package
(say vim and vim-minimal, to cite one example I'm familiar with from my
time a few years ago on Mandrake). Either way that's a limited
workaround, because it doesn't deal with the more obscure choices, which
will tend to be enabled or disabled based on individual distribution
policy for that sort of dependency and the functionality hit taken when
disabling it.
While they certainly have their own faults, source-based distributions
shouldn't have this one, at least not to anywhere near the same extent,
because being source based, the choice of whether to support the extra
functionality and take the extra dependencies is made at the user end, at
compile and install time. That's what Gentoo's USE flags are all about.
If you're using a binary distribution, you're choosing a package set where
untold hundreds, more like thousands, of these choices have been already
made for you. If you choose one more or less compatible with your usage,
purposes and preferences, a good share of them will be the same choices
you would have made anyway and you've saved yourself the hassle of
compiling everything from source at the cost of, probably, a handful of
packages that get installed as dependencies that you'd not need had you
compiled each package with just the support you needed. Hopefully, you
find one fairly close to what you want and you have just those few extra
packages and interdependencies. But, you WILL get those few. It comes
with the territory. It's a tradeoff you choose to take when you choose a
binary distribution. If you don't like it, choose a from source
distribution that allows you to control such things... at the cost of
compiling everything yourself. Your choice.
When it comes to my computer, I'm definitely and admittedly a control
freak, and I had decent hardware, so I chose the extra control. Others
don't mind the loss of functionality and customizability, as long as
it "just works". For them, from all I read, GNOME based Ubuntu tends to
be a pretty good solution, as are (in a different way) various
proprietaryware solutions, where you pay your money and get a more or less
turnkey solution they expect you you to take more or less as is and not be
too interested in poking away at the internals of (indeed, it tends to be
against the EULA to do so). If they are lucky, it'll meet their needs and
wants as well as my Gentoo with KDE has for me, and they'll be as happy
with the results as I've been. =8^)
Duncan