Hello, thanks for your comments.

At Sun, 10 May 2009 21:36:00 +0200,
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
> 
> Hi !
> 
> Thanks for this great work!
> 
> A couple of small points :
> 
> 1)
> On 08 May 2009, at 07:16, Tomoaki Okayama wrote:
> 
>     Hmm, it seems difficult to switch tetex to texlive smoothly...
> 
>     Does anyone have some ideas to avoid the problem by modifying
> 
>     depends/conflicts/replaces of texlive or tetex?
> 
> I have many private input files _ with some rather complex macros _
> so that I'm quite afraid a number of them will be broken with this
> substantial versioning up of tetex-texmf.. (and most of my documents
> too _ including some books, etc.). It will probably require some
> substantial work to upgrade everything.
> 
> Is there no way to be able to keep the old texmf in parallel with the
> new one for a while, just switching from 1 to the other e.g. by
> update-alternatives (or by changing oneself a couple of symlinks ?)
> 
> This might be convenient as a transition for some other users too
> (and probably for a number of fink packages :)
> 
One simple solution is:
 Depends: texlive-texmf | tetex-texmf (>= 3.0-1)
in texlive.info, but I'm not sure whether texlive works with
tetex's texmf. Could you test that please? If it works, I will
change the dependency in the next texlive.info.

> 2)
> the 3 commands "cp -R path1/ path2" in texlive-texmf.info
> rely on an Apple peculiarity _ and break eg. with coreutils' cp.
> Rather use "cp -R path1/* path2"
> 
Thanks. I fixed it.

> 3) Is there no more recent version than sep 2007 ??
> And is "texmf-minimal" not a subset of "texmf-full" ??
> 
There is a new texmf tree, version 2008, explained later.
"texmf-minimal" doesn't seem to be a subset of "texmf-full".

> 4)  The lines 
>  echo "This package contains a teTeX like subset of the TeX Live texmf," >
> README
>  echo "based on the minimal version from Edd Barrets OpenBSD repository.">
> README
> 
> raise 2 questions for me :
> a) since tetex is dead, is there a good reason to keep a "tetex-like subset",
> rather than going to a standard texmf ?
> b) everytime I've used texlive (or derivatives like fptex) in the past, I've
> found that the default distribution was insufficient _ even just for my own
> documents _
> (and a fortiori a "minimal distribution"); I had to revert and choose
> the maximal one... 
> 
I think the complete texmf tree is extremely large, and hang back
about using it. The texmf tree (version 2008) is available at:
 ftp://tug.org/texlive/historic/2008/texlive-20080822-texmf.tar.lzma
and the file size is 860MB (if unpacked, the size becomes 1586MB).
OTOH, the size of texlive_texmf-{full,minimal}-2007g0.tar.gz is 256MB,
which seems to be reasonable.

However, if Fink project can mirror that file (and generated *.deb),
I prefer to use 20080822 rather than 2007g0. It's simple and easy
to maintain for packagers. Current texlive-texmf.info is only one
suggession, and does not mean I think this is the best way.

I want more discussions/comments about this issue:
which is acceptable for Fink?
- tetex-like subset texmf
- full texmf

> 5) I have 2 longstanding wishes :
> a) that the configuration files ( .cfg , .cnf ) be marked
> as such by fink _ especially for the ones in webc2
> ( texmf.cnf, fmtutil.cnf, updmap.cfg ...);
> in particular that the first 3 lines of texmf.cnf (or some equivalent) be true
> ...
> (Maybe drm has comments on this ...)
Do you mean that
 ConfFiles: %p/share/texmf/web2c/{texmf.cnf,fmtutil.cnf,updmap.cfg} ?
Good idea, but marking fmtutil.cnf and updmap.cfg may be not needed.
This is because fmtutil.cnf and updmap.cfg should not be edited by hand
(use fmtutil-sys and updmap-sys instead).

I will add that line to the next texlive.info.

> b) that texmf-local be strictly reserved for local files, ie, to the user, for
> system-wide additions,
Yeah, I agree, but

> and that other fink pkgs install into texmf-dist (and be removed from fink if
> they install
> anything that is older than what texlive provides!)
> 
'texmf' is preferable to 'texmf-dist' according to TDS.

> Thanks again !
> 
> Jean-Francois
> 
Thanks for the good comments and suggestions.

Tomoaki Okayama

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to
Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK i700
Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image 
processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel

Reply via email to