Bug#100332: New package splitting scheme for teTeX in Debian
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 15:56 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> mpost,
> >> mpto,
> >> makempx
> >> /usr/bin/makempy (MetaPost)
> >> /usr/bin/mptopdf
> >
> > I would suggest that MetaPost is now regarded as a core component of a
> > modern TeX distribution, so I'd suggest keeping it in the core.
>
> Hm, well. So far, I have not looked at tetex-bin-core (and the new
> tetex-base) as "core of a modern TeX distribution", but rather as "what
> is needed in a Build-Depends". From this point of view I doubt that
> MetaPost has its place in -core. What do others think?
I am a regular MetaPost user, but I would vote for it going to
tetex-bin-extra. The TEXMF/metapost directory allready is in tetex-extra
and should stay there. I don't expect anybody to uses it for a
Build-Depends. One could try to find out what all the packages
build-depending on tetex-extra actually use, but that would be a lot of
work. If MetaPost were to go to tetex-bin-core (and TEXMF/metapost to
tetex-base), one has to remember to also include
TEXMF/tex/context/base/supp-pdf.tex and
TEXMF/tex/context/base/supp-mis.tex in tetex-base, otherwise inclusion
of MetaPost images with pdfLaTeX would fail.
> >> /usr/bin/gsftopk (probably no longer needed, since xdvik links against libt1)
> >
> > Ditto, although you may be right in your comment.
>
> How do we check that? Or do we simply keep everything that *might* be
> called from mktexpk?
That sounds like the savest thing to do.
> >
> >> /usr/bin/ps2pk (creates a TeX pkfont from a type1 PostScript font)
> >
> > Ditto.
>
> But only (as an alternative to gsftopk) if you change mktex.opt, which
> isn't a conffile. Should it be? Probably yes.
ACK
> >> /usr/bin/allcm
> >> /usr/bin/allec
> >> /usr/bin/allneeded (create many CM/EC pk fonts at once)
> >
> > Why throw away these scripts?
>
> In order to keep tetex-bin-core as small as possible. Not because of
> disk space, but in order to keep it simply. I don't think that any sane
> mind will call allcm in debian/rules before running latex over their
> documentation. Am I insane myself?
These scripts are useful when one installs a system and does not wnat to
wait for font creation when 'in production use'. It would be pointless
and counterproductive to call them from debian/rules, since more fonts
than necessary would be created.
cheerio
ralf
Reply to: