Hi all!
After some days off I am back and want to give some comments:
On Die, 25 Okt 2005, Elrond wrote:
> If they're not intended to coexist at all, this does not
> affect TeX at all. Each does its own job and decides on how
> to rule the world, and conflicts with the other. Job done.
As I see it now, this will be the way we will go. For now. But see
below.
> both can provide. Like tex-ctan-PACKAGE or tex-xdvi, etc...
Also for this, see below.
On Die, 25 Okt 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
> I don't think that it can be out goal that tetex and tex-live can really
> be mixed. It should be possible to install a font that's only in
> texlive in a tetex-based system, or a LaTeX package. But something like
> "dvips from tetex, xdvi from tex-live" cannot be our goal, I think.
Also the part with the fonts will be a problem, as we have decided to
package collections, and not simple packages.
On Die, 25 Okt 2005, Ralf Stubner wrote:
> Obviously, I am not sure about this. Let's say I want to install the
> 'bera' fonts from TeX Live, since they are not in teTeX. AFAIK I would
> have to install the 'texlive-fontsextra' package for this. Looking at
> the tpm-file for this collection, I see several fonts that are both in
> texlive-fontsextra and in (future) tetex-extra: antt, bbm, bbold,
> belleek, cmbright, doublestroke, eulervm, fpl, rsfs (the latter two
Well said, Ralf.
Here we are at the core of the problem: The mixture of packages, and
therefore there will be only *very* few packages which can be mixed
between texlive and tetex.
The debian packages are coming direct from the collections of TeX live,
these collections forming some "pool of interest" (special fonts,
everything necessary for certain languages, etc).
But, as I said, this was our initial decision, taken here on the list.
THe machinery *IS* here to create for every tpm (which is more or less a
CTAN package) a separate debian package. We decided against this, since
this would create something like 1000 packages (and who wants to
maintain all of them!?).
But, in the long run we (does I hear in the back of my head something
calling: "NO don't say anything, at the end you will have even more
work" ;-) can separate out package by package (especially big ones) to
be either taken over from soneone else, or automatically generated from
the texlive `sources'.
Some of these packages have already been separated out:
. cm-super (me)
. texinfo (me)
. lmodern (hmm, who?, I guess again I am a candidate, but for now: no)
Others are waiting:
. cjk (the DD responsible never answered my email about this!?)
. ???
So you see how it *could* work.
But, for now, I see no possibility of *coexistance* of tetex and texlive
on the same system (ie mixing of packages) due to the overlap of
packages.
Once I will write a script checking for every package whether it
actually has to conflict with tetex or not, but this is for later.
Best wishes
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining <preining AT logic DOT at> Università di Siena
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUTTOFT (n.)
The fibrous algae which grows in the dark, moist environment of
trouser turn-ups.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
