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

Re: Adding a latex class to a debian package

On Mit, 18 Jan 2006, Ralf Stubner wrote:
> >> 	tetex-bin | texlive-latex-base


>       tetex-bin | texlive-base-bin, tetex-base | texlive-latex-base

> well as basic LaTeX files (I don't know what the class in question
> needs, but it definitly needs latex.ltx to build latex.fmt). Both the

This is the problem. It is hard to know what the actual deps are.

> 	tetex-bin | texlive-base-bin, tetex-base | texlive-latex-base
> What do the others think? Especially those with more experience than I

Definitely not a bad idea. But OTOH, it is useless, as you cannot mix
tetex-bin iwht texlive-latex-base nor texlive-base-bin with tetex-base,
so the first one would be the shortest possible which makes sense.

> >> > 	/usr/bin/mktexlsr
> Wasn't there something about maintainer scripts should not use absolute
> paths? In the TeX Policy we advocate

Completely true.

> if which mktexlsr >/dev/null; then mktexlsr; fi


Best wishes


Dr. Norbert Preining <preining AT logic DOT at>             Università di Siena
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094      fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
The uneasy feeling that the plastic handles of the overloaded
supermarket carrier bag you are carrying are getting steadily longer.
			--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff

Reply to: