On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 21:27:52 +0100 "Edd Barrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sounds like you are planning on making a far more "fine grained" port > than I have. Be warned it is a massive port that will drive you insane > if you get too involved. I have my port in only 4 modules. Read the > PDF I linked for more info. Ok, I've taken a preliminary look. Let's consider XeTeX. Your base sub-package includes XeTeX. But it can be simply compiled --without-xetex. Then XeTeX (a separate port) can be compiled from its standalone repository (xetex-devel port) or from TL2007 sources (xetex port) and then integrated. If the base (your texmf-minimal) remains unchanged (as it was at the time of TL2007 release) -- it will maybe need some patches for the files outside xetexdir/, but nothing too difficult. (I'm currently experimenting with patches for unified installation of XeTeX-devel with both current TL trunk base and TL2007 base.) The same for other packages with integrated --without-* possibility (pdftex, omega, etex, musixflx..); the only concern is how much patching their sources require and who is willing to maintain that. This can be nicely done with XeTeX since Jonathan Kew always cares of TL integration. So this means that no massive complications must occur. What do you think? Nikola Lečić _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
