Thierry Reding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> - texdoctk does not exist at all (it once existed pre-potato), and it >> never provided pdflatex. It still exists as an executable in >> tetex-bin and texlive-base-bin, but it is a Perl-TK interface to TeX >> documentation > > I will drop that alternative then, and make it explicit. Thanks for > explaining.
What do you mean with "explicit"? both tetex-bin and texlive-base-bin Provide: texdoctk, but it isn't related to package building. >> - tetex will be dropped in lenny, all dependencies in etch should have >> an alternative on the respective texlive packages. For sbaz, this >> probably means >> >> tetex-bin | texlive-latex-base, tetex-extra | texlive-fonts-recommended >> >> but actually there's no simple rule for tetex->texlive mappings. You >> have to try, maybe it needs more packages. If it builds documentation >> in other languages than english, it needs the respective >> texlive-lang-* package. > > I guess in that case it'd be okay to make texlive-latex-base and > texlive-fonts-recommended the default alternatives instead of the tetex > equivalents? Rather not, if the upload is targetted at etch (this is only true for *Build*-Depends). Regards, Frank -- Dr. Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
