On 2008/07/23 22:39, Steven Mestdagh wrote: > Stuart Henderson [2008-07-23, 11:58:00]: > > On 2008/07/23 11:04, Edd Barrett wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 6:41 PM, Steven Mestdagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > The purpose of multipackages is to split stuff up in several parts, not > > > > overlapping. What would be the advantage of changing that? I do find the > > > > current -full pkgname confusing, it's more like "extra". When I read > > > > "full" > > > > I assume everything is in one monolithic package. > > > > > > Ok, I can probably rename that, but again upgrades will not be smooth, > > > as the -full package will still be around with conflicting files for > > > -extra. > > > > @pkgpath and @conflict can help there. > > pkg_add -u does not deal with renamed PKGNAMEs at the moment, AFAIK.
ah sorry, I was thinking of xpdf (where a single package was split in two, but the newly created package could be made a dependency of the main one - that doesn't apply here with texlive).
