[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#190721: splitting of texdoctk is hosed



Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
Extracting tetex-extra produces about 32800 1024 Kb blocks of data which is split up roughly like this:

20758 blocks in /usr/share/texmf/fonts
7456  blocks in /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex
1518  blocks in /usr/share/texmf/omega
60    blocks in /etc (including the conf files for texdoctk)


Ah, this helps me much to grasp the contents
of tetex-extra.

I guess you're being sarcastic here. I wasn't trying to tell you anything I thought you didn't know. This was just a precursor to what I wanted to say afterwards. I was under the impression that the main reason there is a tetex-extra package at all, was to make tetex-base smaller, so looking at what's taking up space isn't a bad idea, from my perspective. :-)


It might be possible (or rather better?) to put texdoctk files in tetex-base, but then tetex-base should depends on perl-tk and note we had another bugs(#170382, #173872) which said "upgrade forces users to install 7Mb extra libs"


We moved texdocktk files in tetex-extra to fix these
problem to some extent, at present.


The only reason to have tetex-base depend on perl-tk, is so that texdoctk isn't broken, but it's broken anyway without the conffiles in tetex-extra.

If there are so many users cry-babying about 7Mb, then stuff all the texdoctx stuff into tetex-extra and leave the dependency there. texdoctk *needs* to be in the same package as its conffiles are. I don't think it's good style to split up files from their configuration files. Like I said, that's just not the way debian works.

I hope you realize that I'm only making these comments to help, not to criticize, since I'm not at all worried about a few megabytes (still have over 1Gb free on a 3.5 Gb /usr) and everything works for me because I have tetex-extra installed. I believe Debian has the best, most aethetically pleasing design of any Linux Distribution, and I want to help keep it that way.


I think the most aesthetically pleasing, most logical, and cleanest option would be to make a package tetex-extra-fonts and put the 21 Mb of font stuff into it and put the rest back into tetex-base.


Hmm, as far as I investigated quickly, many stuffs in /usr/share/texmf/fonts and /usr/share/texmf/tex are
related with each other.

*.fd (and *.sty) files in /usr/share/texmf/tex/ are necessary
to use fonts in /usr/share/texmf/fonts/ so the issue is not so
simple as you might think.

I'm sure it's not. I do think though, that the suggestion to make a tetex-extra-fonts and to concentrate on separating out just font stuff makes a clean break that users would be able to understand and I think that it would achieve the goal of reducing the size of tetex-base in a logical manner.

But I have an impression that we could make the situation
a bit refined if we reconsider the issue.

Thanks,			       2003-5-2(Fri)


That would be great.

-j





Reply to: