Re: RFS: libsbml
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Changyan Xie wrote:
Ok, I admit that the real problem is that the dependence to latex2html
require tetex-extra and a lot of other packages,and after this
additional dependence, my system require another 100 M disk space.
If it is about bloating your production system I would suggest to
use pbuilder which installs all this stuff into a chroot and will
remove it afterwards. This does not really make the build process
faster but keeps your system clean and has other additional advantages
(like beeing sure that all build-dependencies are mentioned and
ensures more or less that auto-builders will probably work).
I'm unsure but there is a chance that an alternative build-dependency
to texlive that is known to be packages more fine grainded might
be possible with less disk space than you mentioned.
I don't like installing a lot of packages just because an unnecessary
package.
Well, whether something is unnecessary depends from the point of
view. To build libsmbl from source it seems to be necessary.
I believe other people may feel the same like me. Why not just
left this an option to user? I mean, in the upstream source, to build
the doc is optional, we can just left this like the original source.
If you ask me I would rather leave the compiled docs out of the
source tarball because these ar not necessary.
Another reason, we have an analogue: this package support matlab binding
too. Of course, we will not enable this binding by default. but user can
simply apt-get source and add this support. This is just like the doc
package's situation, we can disable it by default, but easily enable
it.
Not really. Docs are always welcome and if they are free they
should be packaged. Matlab is neither free nor exist a package
so this support would be not reasonable.
Further more, I think there will be few people want to patch doc
package,
Ahh, really? You will be astonished how many reasons might be
or how many bug reports you might gather for a pretended simple
doc package. I can asure you that the package maintainer of
a doc package has good chances to be forced to patch the docs.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: