Re: Too many conflicts? (tetex vs. texlive)

[Florent Rougon <f.rougon@free.fr>]

Hi,

Ralf Stubner <ralf.stubner@web.de> wrote:

>      Packages that changed `updmap.cfg' must call `updmap-sys' as detailed
>      in Section 4.1.1, `Font configuration'.  Packages that changed
>      `language.dat' or `fmtutil.cnf' must call `fmtutil-sys'.  They must
>      make sure to issue the `mktexlsr' commands before and after this as
>      necessary.

updmap(-sys) calls texhash by default before exiting, and fmtutil(-sys)
calls mktexupd for the files it installs, therefore I think calling
mktexlsr _after_ either of these commands is useless.

I've fixed that in SVN since I updated the rest of the section about
font packages; of course, this can be reverted in case I was wrong.

>      should be useable with any Basic TeX Package.  To achieve this, the
                   ^
(already fixed)

>      font package should depend on `tex-common' but not on a Basic TeX

Norbert wrote in his dh_installtexfonts:

  Your package should depend on tex-common (>= 0.7)

He probably has a good reason for this, but I don't know that reason.

>      Package.  The font package should put the necessary `map' files below
>      `/etc/texmf/map/' (which must be symlinked from

I'd add [done now] a short reference to TETEXDOC.pdf or (since there is
also texlive nowadays) to TDS 1.1.

>      `<TEXMFMAIN>/fonts/map' by the Basic TeX packages), and have them
>      registered by putting a configuration file with extension `.cfg' into
>      `/etc/texmf/updmap.d/' and calling `update-updmap --quiet'.  The file
>      contents will then be incorporated into
>      `/var/lib/texmf/web2c/updmap.cfg', the effective configuration file
>      for `updmap'.  `mktexlsr' and `updmap-sys' have to be called
>      afterwards.  Since `mktexlsr' and `updmap-sys' are provided by the
>      Basic TeX packages, the font package has to ensure that they are only
>      called when they are present in `$PATH'.

Since it appeared these changes weren't yet in SVN (or did I dream
somehow?), I merged them.

> Any comments? Anything missing? Should it be more detailed? Sould one
> include sample code? 

I think it would be really better to include sample code, maybe as an
appendix as you suggest.

-- 
Florent