Re: a "fonts-recommended" metapackage?
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Yes, and it seems you ended up following my suggestion in
> https://bugs.debian.org/613912#40 - when true fonts source later became
> indisputably separate from Ghostscript source :-)
Yep, so maybe this is the time (no, post release!) to get rid of the
gsfonts{,-x11} packages and replace the embedded copies in libgs9-common
and finally have it all use fonts-urw-base35 instead.
Then there will be only one additional copy of the fonts left somewhere in
the texlive packages...
- Fabian
Reply to: