Re: Bug#253098: fix to jadetex based on tetex changes
Adam Di Carlo <aph@debian.org> wrote:
> Erm, I wish that were true. The fact is, I've seen plenty of cases
> where tetex-bin is fully installed but the format files are not there.
This should have been reported (or reassigned, duplicated, whatever) as
tetex bugs, I think.
> Suppose the user breaks configuration and then run fmtutil --all? See
> the jadetex changelog and the archived bugs if you don't believe me.
What do you mean, specifically? I found:
,----
| closes: #183285, #196151, #196027
|
| NB: last two bugs filed against tetex-bin; 'grr' to the tetex
| maintainers for making this change without giving me any heads up
`----
(don't know whether you Cc-ed this to our list; I had read #183285
before, but not the others).
- I think we need a clear policy for the teTeX packages and depending
packages. This is an (the) important issue post-sarge. We'd better
discuss and finish it before we start working on the other big tetex
issue, the package splitting.
- Please don't hesitate to send us copies of your discussions in bug
reports to debian-tetex-main@l.d.o. We have a hell lot of work yet,
and I think nobody of us has the time to follow debian-bugs-dist or
subscribe to the package tracking systems of packages depending on
ours. In fact I must confess that I don't even have a list of all
packages depending on tetex, and which of them just use it, or which
create own formats, have own input files, etc.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Reply to: