Re: Sould tl-latex-base suggest/recommend tl-fonts-recommended?
Ralf Stubner <ralf.stubner@web.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 22:01 +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Ralf Stubner <ralf.stubner@web.de> wrote:
>>
>> > Overall, I would not change texlive's splitting [1] but only add some
>> > connection between tl-latex-base and tl-fonts-recommended. However, IMO
>> > a Depends: would be to much. Especially for buildds but also for users
>> > who know what they are doing it does not hurt to make it possible to
>> > install LaTeX without the LW35 fonts.
>>
>> Won't exactly that be a problem for buildds? Many LaTeX-code-generators
>> do \usepackage{times/mathptmx/...}, and it will be hard to tell
>> maintainers that they need an additional dependency on
>> fonts-recommended.
>
> Why will this be hard? Is it that unusual to have a package that has
> additional functionality when some other package is installed (and
> therefore gets recommended or suggested). If one now uses this
> additional functionalty, one of course has to depend on both packages.
> To me this looks very natural, but I am not claiming to have lots of
> experience in this field.
You are right, it's not uncommon. I just don't feel very comfortable
with this inconsistent situation. But as a short-term solution, we
should keep it like this.
In the long run, the cleanes solution would be to fix TeXlive upstream,
including:
- allowing to put files from equally named directories into different
tpm files (that's the reason why the psnfss tpms are so large, they
include everything with */times/*, */helvet/* etc. in their name, even
if there's no connection to psnfss and the free urw type1 base fonts)
- let collection-latex-base (or however it is called) depend on the
stripped-down urw35.tpm
Regards, Frank
--
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Reply to: