Bug#91249: PROPOSED] bring X support policy into line with must/should/may usage
>> Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> writes:
> Have you checked lately to see how many programs within it *actually*
> depend on the X libraries?
Splitting xdvi off tetex-bin shouldn't be much of a problem. If memory
serves well, it's there because of an historical accident. Back when
Debian had gazillions of TeX packages, collected from different
sources, xdvi had its own package. At some point it was dediced it was
time to end the general madness this was causing, and everything was
replaced with teTeX. This merge produced, AFAIR, the packages we have
nowadays. I can imagine there was some flamewar arround this issue
back then.
AFAICT, splitting off mfw shouldn't be such a big deal, but I honestly
don't know if this would break something dependency-wise. There's a
changelog entry:
* include hint about mfw in README.debian, link the manpage to mf.1
and mfw.base to mf.base (Bug #36898)
but the hint isn't actually there.
> In the case of emacs20:
bah. The binary is 3 MB large. The package is 28 MB large. You could
leave the X-capable binary in emacs20 and move everything else,
including a terminal only emacs-20.7 binary to emacs20-base or
emacs20-text or something like that. Or you could add one more package
and have emacs20, emacs20-common and emacs20-text. Point is, downgrade
emacs20 and leave the other one at the current priority, while
providing an upgrade path for users.
--
Marcelo
Reply to: