Re: tetex-3.0 and the repackaging of the orig.tar.gz files
Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> schrieb:
> On 21.11.04 Frank Küster (frank@debian.org) wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> [.orig.tar.gz is not original and the transition.]
>>
> Hmm, a few others packages (like glibc) repack their tar balls using
> bz2 and repack them into a .orig.tar.gz. I guess this is not an
> option for us, as it would not show an texmf-tree.
> I guess, we should keep it the way it is actually. I personally expect
> (when doing dpkg-source) only a single subdir and not a collection of
> different files. Maybe it is just a personal preference...
Maybe I understood you wrong, but if you do "dpkg-source -x
tetex-base_not-repackaged....dsc", you will get only one new directory,
tetex-base-$version. It is only below that directory that we will get
more than two subdirectories (currently only debian/ and texmf/).
>> But I think we should upload teTeX-3.0 into experimental rather
>> early than too late, anyway, so that people can try compiling it on
>> other architectures, test libkpathsea4, etc.
>>
> Totally agree! I see 2 advantages:
>
> 1. dev of packages with a dep on kpathsea3 could start porting to
> kpathsea4
> 2. more bug reports for teTeX 3.0 before release
>
> Especially the first could perhaps lead to an teTeX 3.0 in sarge...
I don't believe this...
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Reply to: