Bug#204027: tetex-doc: Package doesn't include latex.ltx documentation

[frank@kuesterei.ch (Frank Küster)]

Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> schrieb:

> On 04.08.03 Frank Küster (frank@kuesterei.ch) wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> Maybe I missed something in the archives: Is there a common opinion
>> among tetex maintainers about the parts tetex should be split into?
>> 
> I'm afraid not: Did you have a look at tetex-base/tetex-extra from
> stable? The Style-Files and the FD-Files for the ae-fonts are in
> tetex-extra, meanwhile the tfm's and vf's are in tetex-base...
> Did that change in unstable?

frank@alhambra:~$ dlocate -l tetex-base
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name                  Version               Description
+++-=====================-=====================-============================================================
ii  tetex-base            2.0.2-4.1             basic teTeX library files                                     
frank@alhambra:~$ dlocate /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public/ae/aett8.tfm 
tetex-base: /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public/ae/aett8.tfm
frank@alhambra:~$ 

It seems that this particular thing has changed. However, I still believe
we should think about the right way to split tetex into
packages. However, I will start a new thread on debian-tetex-maint
instead of answering to one particular bug report.

Bye, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie