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

for sarge-release

Hi all,

thanks for very active discussion of all of you in this lists.

My main concern at present is to provide fully functional
tetex packages at sarge release.

My understanding are as follows;

I prefer a simple current update-updmap and to document its
usage somewhere, or rather to create teTeX Policy.

About postinst of tetex-base, I'm not sure yet if no tests on 
texmf.cnf is really good or not.  I guess its primary idea might 
be to check if generic environment for TeX is normal/sane and so
I doubt if it has much meaning to make it more precise or strict,
but Florent's improvement might be useful.

> 5. Make links from /etc/texmf/dvips/{psfonts,pdftex,dvipdfm}.map to the
>    respective files. 

I did this only because I wanted to make tetex-base same as
an upstream structure and it's okay if I understand correctly.

On arabtex issue, we only need to remove Conflicts line
of tetex-bin and add it to tetex-base.

I'm willing to adopt Frank's idea of language.dat handling
and I'll remove unnecessary (duplicated) lines from postinst
of tetex-base and apply a patch of him.  (I assume Frank intends
to fix this until sarge.)

Hilmar's comment on texdoc manpage is correct, I believe.

I think the above would be almost all necessary fixes
which should be done until sarge release.

I will, hopefully, work on these in this week and welcome
any comments on these.

Thanks again and sorry for late response.

Regards,			2004-2-11(Wed)

 Debian Developer & Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
 Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@debian.org>
 Department of Math., Univ. of Tokushima

Reply to: