Re: packages size versus files under dpkg control
On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 09:50:02AM +0200, Norbert Preining wrote:
> 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.
Welcome back from holidays! I will pester you with a lot of
texlive questions/problems/... soon :-)
Back to your question: I personally hate files that are not
under dpkg control, because you cannot check using debsums,
dpkg -L, dpkg -S, etc.
That said, a lot of packages act that way, e.g. Python and Emacs
compile their .py and .el files into .pyc/.pyo and .elc files at
installation time.
AFAIK, there are plans to register and unregister files with the
package management, but currently this is not possible.
Conclusion: Go for 2 and hope, that someone implements dpkg file
register/unregister some day. But do *not* delete the
definition files, so that one can re-create the font files
easily without having to do the full re-installation cycly. If
I understand you correctly, the definition files are not that
huge.
Cheers,
--
Wolfgang Borgert <debacle@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~debacle/
Reply to: