Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
>> Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis:
>>> * gnu/packages/tex.scm (texlive-texmf-minimal)[arguments]: Move contents
>>> of "prune" build phase...
>>> [source]: ...to a snippet here.
>> It looks nicer this way, but a possible downside is the extra derivation
>> and recompression of the patched source.
>> No strong opinion here though.
> My motivation was probably misguided.  My hope was that building
> “texlive-texmf-minimal” would no longer require the very large download
> of the full texlive-texmf sources but only the much smaller pruned
> sources.  If this is the case I think it would be advantageous for
> users.  However, if building from source would cause them to download
> the big tarball first, then patch and repack, and then build the package
> — that would obviously not be great.
> Do we provide substitutes for snippet-patched sources?

Yes, as long as there’s a derivation, there’s a substitute.

But really, we should get rid of this monolithic texlive and import
individual CTAN packages, while still providing a big texlive
meta-package for those who want the 4 GiBs.


Reply via email to