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

Bug#189343: tetex-doc: poor Description:



On 09.08.03 Stefan Ulrich (stefan.ulrich@zen.co.uk) wrote:
> Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> writes:

Hi,

> >  If you want a full installation of teTeX
> >  you have to install tetex-extra.
> >  . 
> >  Together with tetex-bin you'll have a minimal installation.
> 
> Together with tetex-bin you'll have a minimal installation.
> For a full installation of teTeX, you should also install
> tetex-extra.
> 
Is this an extra (the last) paragraph?

> ...  programs belonging to teTeX, i.e. the (La)TeX compiler itself,
> and variants like pdf(la)tex, e-TeX etc. It also contains auxiliary
> programs like dvips and xdvi<is that true?>,
>                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It is. There are some wishlist bugs about splitting xdvi off from
tetex-bin as it seems to be one of the few programs in tetex-bin,
which depends on xlibs. The other program is that /usr/bin/mfw
(Metafont with support for displaying generated characters).

> >  You need at least additional tetex-base to get a useful installation.
> 
> To get a useful installation, you'll need at least tetex-base in
> addition.
> 
Perhaps we can can leave that sentence out, as tetex-bin depends on
tetex-base.

> >  .
> >  Whenever you wondered, why there is a big emptiness below
> >  /usr/share/doc/texmf/ install that package.
> 
> <Are jokes needed in a short description? I'd rather have it
> concise. Otherwise it would need rewording.>
> 
Please keep in mind that previously mentioned amount of alcohol. ;-)

H. 
-- 
sigmentation fault



Reply to: