packages size versus files under dpkg control

[Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at>]

Dear DD!

I would like to have your comment on the following packaging decision:

In packaging the cm-super fonts, i.e. repackaging the pts-tetex-cm-super
package, we have two options:

1) Install all font files (*.pfb) as is

2) Install a compressed definition file and create the pfb files 
   at package installation time, then deleting the definition file.

Why would someone want the second approach: SIze reason! In the first
version the deb has 57M, while in the second approach we would have
about half the size.

Advantage of 1)
- all files are under dpkg control
- no file under dpkg control is deleted in the postinst script

Advantage of 2)
- smaller size, less load on mirrors and users 


Could one of you suggest what would be the optimal solution for this
case?

Best wishes

Norbert

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining <preining AT logic DOT at>             Università di Siena
sip:preining@at43.tuwien.ac.at                             +43 (0) 59966-690018
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094      fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BISHOP'S CAUNDLE
An opening gambit before a game of chess whereby the missing pieces
are replaced by small ornaments from the mantelpiece.
			--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff