Bug#225004: tetex-extra: Type1 fonts should be in a separate package
On 11.02.04 Frank Küster (email@example.com) wrote:
> Hilmar Preusse <firstname.lastname@example.org> schrieb:
> Well, it would be nice to have a small changelog.Debian for the new
> packages with no information that's boring to non-TeX-users. The
> problem with this is that bugs can only be closed with _one_
> changelog file, and we would have to duplicate the entries that
> refer to xfonts-tetex and tetex-extra-fonts.
debian/changelog is for the source package so it can be used to close
bugs. I propose to create an own changelog for xfonts-type1, mention
the closed bug there and thats it.
> I would suggest to install the standard source changelog. Look at this
> "diff" (in fact it's hand-crafted):
> # Install upstream changelog.
> - dh_installchangelogs texmf/ChangeLog -p tetex-base
> + dh_installchangelogs texmf/ChangeLog -p tetex-base -p tetex-extra-fonts
I think the upstream changelog is definitely not needed in
> >> Does tetex-extra-fonts really replace all these packages???
> > Nope. I've just taken the line from tetex-extra. I guess I should
> > clean up there too...
> You really should. I tried to install all of them, using dpkg. I first
> installed tetex-extra-fonts, then xfonts-tetex, and then:
> # dpkg -i tetex-extra_2.0.2-5.1_all.deb
> Selecting previously deselected package tetex-extra.
> dpkg: regarding tetex-extra_2.0.2-5.1_all.deb containing tetex-extra:
> tetex-extra-fonts conflicts with tetex-nonfree
> tetex-extra provides tetex-nonfree and is to be installed.
> dpkg: error processing tetex-extra_2.0.2-5.1_all.deb (--install):
> conflicting packages - not installing tetex-extra
> Errors were encountered while processing:
> I think all we need is
Does tetex-extra provides tetex-nonfree? Well tetex-extra-fonts
should nevertheless not conflifct with it.
> Depends: tetex-base_$next-version
> Conflicts: tetex-extra <=2.0.2-$current-version
> where $current-version would be 5.1 and $next-version would be 6 if the
> patch is included in the next upload. tetex-base has all the necessary
> >> +# now split off Type1-files
> >> + grep pfb$$ debian/tetex-extra.files > debian/tetex-extra-fonts.files
> >> + grep afm$$ debian/tetex-extra.files >> debian/tetex-extra-fonts.files
> >> grep -E '\.(afm|pfb)$$'
> > OK, thanks.
> Just another general question. If we only put PFB and AFM files into
> tetex-extra-fonts, shouldn't it be named tetex-extra-t1fonts or the
Still liable to change.
> Alternatively, we could include all fonts currently shipped with
> tetex-extra. However, the font files in tetex-extra take
> 152Mbyte instead of 5.8Mbyte in tetex-extra-fonts.
Noooo. Don't do that! Who else really want that fonts?
How do we call our xfonts interface then? xfonts-tetex-extra? And
later create an xfonts-tetex-base, when we've split of the
Type1-fonts of tetex-base?
> >> +# create soft links in usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/ and list these files
> >> +# in xfonts-tetex
> >> + ln -s `cat debian/tetex-extra-fonts.files|sed s#^u#\/u#g` debian/tetex-base/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/
> >> + echo "usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/*" > debian/xfonts-tetex.files
> >> These links are not Policy-compliant.
> > AFAICS dh_link needs either the source destination files on the
> > Command line or in a file. The file already halve exist. I would have
> > to paste at the end of each line an usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/.
> Not at the end - while ln has the order $target $linkname, dh_link takes
> $source $target.
I think in the end both mean the same. ln wants first the name of the
file and and the name of the link. dh_link:
dh_link usr/share/man/man1/foo.1 usr/share/man/man1/bar.1
Make bar.1 be a symlink to foo.1
dh_link don't like directory as link name. So I have to paste the
name of each file behind usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/. Does anybody
has a quick solution for that (beside cat tetex-extra-fonts.files
|cut -d / -f 8)?
> > To me that sed-script construct looked easier. If that is really not
> > policy compliant I'll change it.
> You could do it with
> ln -s `cat debian/tetex-extra-fonts.files|sed s#^usr/#../../../../../#g` debian/tetex-base/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/
Well, I don't really expect it to happen, but what if the number of
> or with
> sed -e 's#^#usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/ #g' \
> tetex-base-2.0.2/debian/tetex-extra-fonts.files >> debian/tetex-base.links
> dh_link -p tetex-base
Way round. First the file, then the link.
> No, /usr/X11R6/lib/... is in the same top-level directory (/usr) as