From: Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 02:33:44PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> > Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Package: debiandoc-sgml
> > > Version: 1.1.99
> > > Severity: normal
> > >
> > > debiandoc-sgml currently
> > >
> > > Recommends: libpaperg, tetex-bin, tetex-extra, texinfo, latex-cjk-all,
> > > gs-esp | gs
> > >
> > > This should be changed to allow texlive to be used, too. I'm not sure
> > > which texlive packages are needed, but I'll investigate this using
> > > debian-reference as an example.
> >
> > The packages needed for debian-reference are
> >
> > texlive-latex-extra texlive-latex-recommended texlive-fonts-recommended
> >
> > So this could be
> >
> > Recommends: libpaperg, tetex-bin | texlive-latex-recommended, \
> > tetex-extra | texlive-latex-extra, \
> > tetex-extra | texlive-fonts-recommended, \
> > texinfo, latex-cjk-all, gs-esp | gs
>
> I agree with latex-cjk-all
>
> Interesting suggestions. But I consider rests are not so critical since
> these are recommends (not depends). You can install texlive packages
> without these changes.
I also think that latex-cjk-all (+fonts) should be enough as a
Build-Depends for debian-reference, since latex-cjk-common already
depends on tetex or texlive.
But you might precipitate the move to TeXlive as default TeX
distribution by putting texlive|tetex (etc.) in the Build-Depends.
We all have to move to TeXlive now that teTeX is not actively
developed anymore, so changing to TeXlive might be a good exercise
now. I myself will wait for the transition of latex-cjk to default to
the TeXlive distribution after my exams in February.
As for the Depends, I don't think debian-reference should have any
Depends or Recommends on TeX packages at all, since the binary
packages only provide HTML, PS, PDF and plain text files. TeX is not
needed for the end-user.
For debiandoc-sgml, I think latex-cjk-all is enough as a Recommends,
because latex-cjk-{chinese,japanese} recommends already some fonts.
No need to make it any more complex than it is. ;)
> I really do not understand maze of packages around latex and gs
> latex-cjk-japanese-wadalab
> gsfonts-wadalab-*
>
> gs-cjk-resource
> latex-cjk-*
>
> Are they consistently organized. These font issues are really out of my
> understanding now. (Maybe I should discuss this with different bug
> report)
The gsfonts-wadalab-* packages are the original Type1 fonts. I don't
have them installed, and don't know what they are used for. I do know
that they depend on defoma, so possibly they integrate in X, but I
wouldn't know for sure. In any case, this package is not needed for
latex-cjk.
latex-cjk-japanese-wadalab is based on the original Wadalab Type1
fonts, but it contains a few patches by Werner Lemberg, the CJK
author. This package also includes font subsets in Unicode.
latex-cjk depends on this package alone; gsfonts-wadalab-* cannot be
used with CJK. I think I have made it clear in the package
description of latex-cjk-japanese-wadalab.
latex-cjk-japanese-wadalab uses the following Perl script on the
original Wadalab fonts:
ftp://ftp.dante.de/pub/tex/language/chinese/CJK/4_7.0/contrib/wadalab/fixwada2.pl
Here's what it fixes:
. Make all glyph names compliant to the Adobe Glyph List (AGL) to
get proper ToUnicode mappings in PDF documents.
. Fix the encoding vector in the PFBs to contain only glyphs which
actually have an outline.
. Update the version number and creation date.
. Fix a typo in the original fonts (`UniqueId' -> `UniqueID').
The original Wadalab fonts can be downloaded here (they are also
included in the Debian source package of latex-cjk-japanese-wadalab):
ftp://ftp.dante.de/pub/tex/support/ghostscript/3rdparty/fonts/kanji/Font/
To make a long story short, gs and latex-cjk are completely
independent of each other. I have been a happy user of gs-esp +
gs-cjk-resource, but have no idea if this changes anything.
Cheers
Danai SAE-HAN
韓達耐
--
題目:《淚》
作者:楊億（９６４－１０２０）
錦字梭停掩夜機，白頭吟若怨新知。
誰聞隴水回腸后，更聽巴猿拭袂時。
漢殿微涼金屋閉，魏宮清曉玉壺欹。
多情不待悲秋氣，只是傷春鬢已絲。
