Re: restore-symlinks, remove-bad-license-files etc.
Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> schrieb:
> Hi all,
>
> (1. and 2. about tetex-base, 3. about tetex-bin)
>
> 1. I had a look at debian/restore-symlinks. It sets during build a
> symlink from to /usr/share/texmf/dvips/base/psfonts.map to
> /usr/share/texmf/dvips/config/psfonts.map. I'm wondering if we need,
> that link. I tried dvips, dvipdfm and pdftex and nobody even touched
> that file. We should remove it.
The script blindly restores every symlink we deleted from the upstream
tetex-texmf-...tar.gz. And I think for consistency, we should keep it.
> 2. I tried to prepare a fix for #182324, by adding an entry to
> debian/remove-bad-license-files. Unfortunately that script is only
> called in the clean stage of debian/rules and nowhere else. Is that
> intended?
More or less, because if we can't distribute a file in the binary
package, we also cannot distribute it in the source packages. It is kind
of useless to call the script every time clean is run. It is useful,
however, for upgrades and similar.
So if we want to fix this for tetex-2.0.2, we will have to create a new
orig.tar.gz and fake a new version number 2.0.2, I guess.
> 3. #183517 and #191254 contain 2 trivial patches, we could at least
> apply to patch-tmp of tetex-bin.
I agree. By the way, I don't know whether it is correct (and prudent) to
mark epstopdf bugs as forwarded to Heiko. In fact there is no upstream
development, and if there will be, it is likely that Heiko will be
involved, but not really sure.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Reply to: