Re: Issues with and after upgrade to texlive
Frans Pop <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Monday 16 April 2007 11:49, you wrote:
>> Currently, tetex-bin Depends: texlive. If we change that to
>> Depends: texlive-latex-base, texlive-latex-recommended, \
> Thanks for the quick replies, and for taking this space issue seriously.
>> then we loose files that used to be installed with tetex (notably
>> context), but I think we'll get much closer to what most people
>> actually used of tetex-bin.
Oh, I forgot texlive-lang-all, or instead a selection of languages which
are available in tetex.
> One part of the space increase I saw is probably more to how aptitude
> handles recommends than due to the texlive packaging.
> I have tetex-extra installed (as dep from jadetex), but did not have most
> of its recommends installed (latex-beamer, latex-xcolor, lmodern, pgf,
> preview-latex-style). During the upgrade, those packages will be selected
> automatically by aptitude because they are also recommended by
Well, if one cares about diskspace, letting aptitude install recommended
packages by default may not be the best thing.
> It may make sense to document a list of packages for which it is safe to
> unselect them if they were not installed before.
Where do you think such a list could go? I mean, this is before
NEWS.Debian is shown. But maybe we can play for tetex-extra the same
game as for tetex-bin, and actually get to a smaller selection. And
everybody should know that they can usually safely deselect recommended
> It is possible that aptitude will behave differently from the commandline
> when called as 'aptitude dist-upgrade'
I think this depends on the configuration settings in aptitude
(Options/Dependency handling in the UI)
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)