Bug#100332: tetex-bin: please move xdvi to its own package

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>]

On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Julian Gilbey wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 01:21:02AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > A better way might be to just Suggests: the xlibs package.  (This can
> > > be done using the -d option to dpkg-shlibdeps and doing xdvi
> > > separately from the other binaries, something like:
> > > dh_shlibdeps -X xdvi.bin -- -dSuggests -edebian/tmp/usr/bin/xdvi.bin
> > > or similar.)
> > >
> > > Then in the xdvi wrapper, check that the necessary library is
> > > present.
> >
> > We are (hopefully) shortly before a freeze, so don't let us make such
> > changes. The splitting of the tetex-* packages is on our TODO list (but
> > delayed until woody is released).
> >
> >
> > To make it short:
> >
> > tetex-bin in woody will continue to depend on xlibs.
> > This will change after woody is released.
> > End of discussion.
>
> We're at least 2-3 months away from tetex being frozen.  My suggestion
> is to remove the dependency on xlibs without splitting the package:
> basically, anyone trying to use xdvi should be working under X
> already, so will automatically have xlibs.  The only issue might be
> version skew.  I wouldn't like to have xdvi in a package on its own;
> that would be downright confusing.

This solution is ugly as hell. I'm stricly against risking to break
anything only to hide the dependencies of xdvi (and oxdvi).

And where's the big gain? When you install tetex-bin you install more than
36 MB of teTeX packages - xlibs has less than 5 MB.

>    Julian

cu
Adrian

-- 
A "No" uttered from deepest conviction is better and greater than a
"Yes" merely uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble.
                -- Mahatma Ghandi