Bug#91249: PROPOSED] bring X support policy into line with must/should/may usage
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 01:57:53AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> + requirements when using the X Window System. If such a package
> + is of higher priority than the X packages on which it depends, it
> + is required that either the X-specific components be split into a
> + separate package; an alternative version of the package, which
> + includes X support, be provided; or the package's priority be
> + lowered.
This affects emacs20 and tetex-bin. Note that both these are large
packages, so duplicating them into with-X and without-X versions isn't
necessarily a good idea: it increases the size of the archive (negligibly,
I suppose considering how big it is anyway), and probably makes it a
nuisance as far as installs go (you first download the non-X version,
then you have to download the X version as well afterwards).
Alternatively, the X support packages priority could be raised back to the
level it's been in potato and before.
Alternatively, tetex could be removed from standard, and
made available through either an appropriate task-* package
(task-tex? task-word-processing?). I'm not sure I can think of a task-*
that emacs could reasonably be added to, though.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Reply to: