On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 15:01 +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:

> 
> To give you an example, before the FC5 release I was asked whether I can
> move tetex-doc to Extras what contains all the documentation in the
> texmf tree so that it can be removed from Core, because the tetex-doc
> RPM has more than 50M in size. I refused that of course. But there's a
> hard pressure to make it smaller even if the total size of all teTeX
> rpms is about 110M.

Ouch.
OK - I just looked at why the TeX Live based packages I'm experimenting
with produce much bigger doc and fonts package.

I went through Fedora teTeX and only grabbed zip files from TeX Live
that provided something that Fedora had.

It seems that TeX Live has a lot of documentation that teTeX did not
have, and it also seems that lot of documentation that teTeX had has dvi
files, TeX Live has as PDF - and there is not a dvi file to justify
deletion of the PDF.

Just a random example - the totpages.dvi file in tetex 3 is about 28kb
and the totpages.pdf file in tex live is about 200kb, ~ 8x the size.

Also - the packaging I did results in about 150 more .pfb files. It
looks like Thomas did some serious pruning with teTeX that has not been
done with TeX Live.

I wonder if debian has any statistics on which tex live packages are
most requested by their users, so intelligent pruning to extras could be
done.

Reply via email to