update-fmtutil and fmtutil (was: update-updmap vs. updmap --enable)

[Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>]

Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp> wrote:

> Also, not investigated but concerning update-fmtutil, should
> we provide separate files for tetex-bin and tetex-extra?

I think we needn't. I also was surprised that this isn't split when I
first found it out. But it seems fmtutil is clever enough not to try to
generate formats that it will not be able to build. I see no special
benefit in splitting, except, perhaps, that it makes the package
splitting clearer. But I wouldn't want to change this, at least not
before we have decided on a general future-proof splitting scheme for
tetex - that is, post-sarge.

> And it might be better to remove FMT files before running
> fmtutil?  At least 'fmtutil --missing' seems not regenerating
> existing FMT files, and when omega and lambda changed their 
> FMT files names, old FMT files remained for a while.

Hm, I don't think that it is necessary to remove them before every
run. But we have to make sure that tetex-extra formats are removed when
the package is removed, so that they will correctly be regenerated when
it is installed again. 

Ah, in principle we do this, but it is wrapped in an if construct that
is to tight:

$ cat src/Packages/tetex-base/tetex-base-2.0.2-CVS/debian/tetex-extra.postrm
[...]
if [ x"$1" = "xremove" -a -x /usr/bin/mktexlsr ]; then
    (cd /var/lib/texmf/web2c && rm -f amstex.fmt omega.oft lambda.oft mpost.mem metafun.mem omega.fmt lambda
.fmt)
    /usr/bin/mktexlsr
#    $TEXCONFIG init
    ucf_purge
fi

The removal should also be done when mktexlsr is no longer available.

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie