Re: RFC: groff split (was Re: Packaging WM themes - question)
On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 03:32:55PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> I should ask for opinions about groff, which I'm about to adopt. The
> package has to be divided no matter what; gxditview depends on X, and
> can't be in an important-priority package. groff itself is really just in
> the base system because it's needed to read man pages, so my intent
> (largely implemented, but unreleased) has been to generate three binary
> packages:
>
> groff-base: Basic package containing binaries, fonts, and drivers
> needed to read man pages in ASCII/Latin-1/UTF-8.
> groff: Most of the other optional components - DVI, PostScript,
> and HTML output, etc., various random tools, the large
> Japanese fonts, and documentation.
> gxditview: The gxditview program, the only bit that depends on X.
>
> groff-base is about 1Mb installed; groff weighs in at somewhat over 5Mb;
> gxditview is about 100Kb. Since groff will be priority optional, I could
> be persuaded to ship gxditview with that if people don't mind the
> dependencies on libxaw7 and xlibs.
>
> Comments?
Do the above.
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: