On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 12:41:40PM -0400, David Bremner wrote: > On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 15:09:39 +0100, Jan Hauke Rahm <jhr@debian.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 05:47:52PM -0400, David Bremner wrote: > > > It seems there are some biblatex styles that require 0.9c or newer, so > > > it would be nice to have a newer biblatex packaged if/when you get > > > time. > > > > If only it were that easy... :) Newer versions depend on biber which is > > not available in Debian yet. I'm still figuring out how to proceed best. > > I was talking to my wife, who is the biblatex user in our house, and it > seems the dependency on biber is more of a recommendation. Biblatex > seems to function OK using bibtex in place of biber. Of course there > might be some issues that we don't know about, but at least it generates > OK looking documents in her tests. Thanks for checking! It seems biber can be considered a more loose dependency. I'd rather have it in Debian ASAP though, if only to avoid a huge mess of documenting what works and what not. biblatex 1.1 says: ,---- | Starting with this release, we'll leverage the possibilities of Biber | to support features not possible with BibTeX. That's why most major | new features in this release are 'Biber only'. `---- biblatex (as of 0.9b) has another new dependency: logreq which I don't see in Debian yet. I can easily package it, I guess. I'll have a closer look in the next few days. Maybe uploading biblatex 1.2 isn't such a bad idea after all. :) Thanks, David! Hauke -- .''`. Jan Hauke Rahm <jhr@debian.org> www.jhr-online.de : :' : Debian Developer www.debian.org `. `'` Member of the Linux Foundation www.linux.com `- Fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe www.fsfe.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature