Bug#190721: splitting of texdoctk is hosed

[Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp>]

From: Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de>
Subject: Bug#190721: splitting of texdoctk is hosed
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 00:08:32 +0200

> > As I said before, the similar problems remain unless
> > we merge tetex-base and tetex-extra into only one big
> > tetex-base;
> > 
> Don't think so. I think there are some basic things which works if
> you only have tetex-base installed, but work better, if tetex-extra
> is installed. But don't ask me which one... 

Well, I might explain too simply (or too exaggerated ;)

> Debian woody. Perhaps we should again split off texdoctk (and the
> config-files) to an extra-package. Then we should put it as Recommend
> or Suggest. Don't know about (t|p)xfonts.

Please note that texdoctk itself is in tetex-bin and
supporting files are in tetex-extra, and tetex-bin and
tetex-extra are built from different teTeX sources
(tetex-bin from tetex-src-*.tar.gz and tetex-extra from
tetex-texmf-*.tar.gz) so if we split off texdoctk
then we need texdoctk-bin and texdoctk-conffiles(?)

I suspect this is not so good idea...

> > Have you any good design?
> > 
> Nothing in the moment, except to split off everthing, which is not
> needed for everybody (to extra packages) and then merge the rest to
> tetex-base. Yes, I know is is a hard job to figure out, which stuff
> depends on which and to write then correct Recommends- and
> Suggests-fields.

Agreed basically.  However as far as I checked with

dpkg -L tetex-extra | grep /usr/share/texmf/tex
dpkg -L tetex-extra | grep /usr/share/texmf/fonts
dpkg -L tetex-extra | grep /etc

the current situation is fairy good one, IMHO.

So I doubt that splitting is really necessary and
I suspect only minor changes might be enough.

Anyway we are glad to hear any real idea or advice.

Thanks,			   2003-5-2(Fri)

-- 
 Debian Developer & Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
 Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@debian.org>
 Department of Math., Tokushima Univ.