Re: Bug#312897: ITP: texlive -- The TeXlive system packaged for debian
Bill Allombert <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 09:41:47AM +0200, frank wrote:
>> If we had texlive in Debian, there wouldn't be such pressure. teTeX
>> would be updated to the current version shortly after a release, and
>> then would stick to that upstream version no matter what happened until
>> the next release. And the buildds and package maintainers would be happy.
> Not too sure about that. It seems likely that teTeX and TeX-live
> packages will have to conflict with each others. This mean that in order
> to build a Debian package, you might need to remove you TeX installation
> and install another one. This is likely to be painful.
The packages that contain files with the same names (e.g. the
executables, basic TeX input files,...) will have to conflict, of
course, but you can use LaTeX styles from texlive with teTeX. And I
would try to have a virtual package "tex-system" or the like, and
packages would Build-depends: tex-system | tetex-bin. Thus, the buildds
would be safe, only individual users still have a chance to spot
> OTOH, TeX having a very high level of internal compatibility, it might
> be possible to mix and match, but that might require to split teTeX
> debian packages in smaller chunk.
We do plan to split tetex-bin further, and to change the splitting
scheme for tetex-base. But I don't see currently how this is _needed_
for coexistence. You can either have a pure teTeX, a pure texlive, or
teTeX with missing parts taken from texlive packages. It would be hard
(and hardly sensible) to try the other way round, texlive basic packages
with, say, tetex-extra.
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich