Re: Open problems
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 13:38:07 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp> wrote:
>
> > This is certainly of no help at present but I feel that many
> > conffiles can be shipped as normal files because they can be,
> > if necessary, customized only by putting modified versions under
> > /usr/local/share/texmf generally by sysadmin.
> > IMHO only files which essentially need to be modified with other
> > packages are conffiles.
>
> In the past, I (and I'm sure Norbert too) also were inclined to handle
> it like this. But discussions with other people, e.g. Manoj Srivastava
> who's the main editor of Debian Policy, forced us to think it over. And
> indeed, if we want to comply with Debian policy, any file which can
> reasonably be changed to change the behavior of the system must be a
> configuration file.
>
> I think the compromise we've written into the TeX Policy is reasonable:
I see, and the TeX Policy looks reasonable to me also.
I should read again our TeX Policy.
> > For example /usr/share/doc/texlive-xetex/xetex/XeTeX-reference.ltx.gz
> > Further it is not clear to me what fonts we should use under
> > Debian/Linux. Does anyone has any idea with this issue?
>
> I have not had the time to look into xetex at all. If you've found
> problems, please report them to the BTS, so that we can keep track of
> them. I suspect that they will turn out to be upstream bugs, since even
> our dependencies are taken from upstream.
Yes this is certainly upstream bugs but before reporting
to the BTS I should understand the problem more clearly.
Regards, 2007-6-8(Fri)
--
Debian Developer & Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
Atsuhito Kohda <kohda AT debian.org>
Department of Math., Univ. of Tokushima
Reply to: