Re: dvips35.map disappearing from ls-R after force-purge-then-reinstall of tex-common

[Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de>]

On 26.06.06 Florent Rougon (f.rougon@free.fr) wrote:
> Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> wrote:

Hi,

I'm goinf through some old E-Mails I didn't have the time to read
yet.

> > Isn't the lesson that no static files should be in /var/lib/texmf/?  We
> > could just put the symlink into TEXMFDIST/web2c.
> 
> Yes, I think so. I'd say:
> 
>   1. When several packages share a directory for storing generated files
>      (not registered with dpkg), you're in trouble for the purge
>      procedure. Especially when these packages are maintained by
>      different people.
> 
>   2. In this particular case, we would be safe if:
> 
>        a) Every package that uses /var/lib/texmf/ depended on
>           tex-common (so that tex-common can wipe out the directory when
>           purged).
> 
>        b) Every non-optional file stored in /var/lib/texmf/ was
>           regenerated at configure time by the responsible package (so
>           that the sequence I gave in my previous mail doesn't cause any
>           file loss under /var/lib/texmf/).
> 
> As far as the pool files are concerned, this is static stuff,
> right? So, they are in the wrong TEXMF tree, IMHO. As for mfw.base,
> I don't know its purpose, so I cannot comment.
> 
I don't find the statement above in the "The Debian TEX sub-policy".
Isn't it worth to be put into it?

H.
-- 
Gordon's Law:
	If you think you have the solution, the question was poorly phrased.
  http://www.hilmar-preusse.de.vu/