Re: [Pkg-octave-devel] /usr/bin/mex and texlive
On Oct 3, 2006, at 6:44 AM, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
* Thomas Weber <thomas.weber.mail@gmail.com> [2006-09-28 12:13]:
there's a discussion on debian-release regarding tetex and texlive.
The package texlive-lang-polish has an (outdated) conflict against
octave-forge, because it ships with a /usr/bin/mex file (a symlink to
pdfetex).
The current octave2.1-forge package has /usr/bin/mex2.1,
octave2.9-forge hasn't any mex-binaries in /usr/bin/; the current
octave-forge CVS is a little bit chaotic due to the move to packages,
but it seems that the mex/ directory is gone for good.
So I guess it boils down to wether we are okay with handing
/usr/bin/mex to another package?
It seems that the mex program is obsolete and mkoctfile in octave2.9
handles mex files directly. I would then handle it to
texlive-lang-polish and drop the /usr/bin/mex alternative. Before
going ahead, I would like to hear from the upstream authors of
octave-forge whether this is appropriate (Cc:ing this message to Paul
Kienzle, although I think he lurks this mailing list).
Handing /usr/bin/mex to another package is appropriate.
mex is gone from octave2.9-forge and won't pop up in octave since it is
an m-file there.
The command line form of mex in octave2.9 is "mkoctfile -mex".
- Paul
Reply to: