On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 12:42:57PM +0200, Thomas Esser wrote:
> Reinhard Kotucha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [full mail at http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.tetex.beta/805]
>
> > the file ifpdf.sty is in the directory
> ...
> > because some plain TeX users might want to remove tex/latex from the
> > search path.
>
> ifpdf.sty comes from
> CTAN:macros/latex/contrib/oberdiek
> ^
> and currently, all these files are installed into tex/latex/oberdiek.
> Splitting the package and/or having a different install rule for ifpdf.sty
> makes some extra work for a questionable goal.
>
> Heiko, what is your opinion? Do you think that ifpdf.sty should be
> installed into tex/generic?
>
> Thomas
Currently this three packages are plain compatible of my packages
in CTAN:macros/latex/contrib/oberdiek/:
alphalph.sty
ifpdf.sty
ifvtex.sty
Because I am using the LaTeX infrastructure for documenting the
packages (if*.sty not yet), I would prefer the current CTAN location.
However the installation locations of the tex files
can be changed, perhaps:
TDS:tex/generic/oberdiek/*.sty (plain and latex compatible packages)
TDS:tex/latex/oberdiek/*.sty (latex only packages)
The documentation location I would like to have unsplitted,
for the case that I add some generic documentation
(overview for my packages, generic unpacking and installation
instructions, ...). This requires the knowledge of the relative
locations and they must not differ from the relative locations
in CTAN. Thus the same directory seems to be the best choice.
TDS:doc/latex/oberdiek/*.pdf
Also the sources should not be split, thus I can provide
a master .ins script.
TDS:source/latex/oberdiek/*
Yours sincerely
Heiko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
