[tex-live] Re: Packaging SourceFiles for TeX live/Debian
frank at kuesterei.ch
Tue Aug 2 13:24:41 CEST 2005
Norbert Preining <preining at logic.at> wrote:
> On Die, 02 Aug 2005, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>> >- Leave it in source and binary and try to hack all errors
>> obviously this is the Right thing to do. But its a pretty big
>> bit of work.
> Well, obviously it is not to me. Why is the source actually needed for
> *running* TeX?
Even if it isn't needed, it should be as correct as possible. Talking
in bug severities, it's minor or wishlist, but if it's a bug it's still
a bug, even when it's in a separate binary package with the sources, or
only in the source package.
>> can you give an example of a package where the problems apply?
In my view, the ideal solution to this would be to have a source package
that produces the architecture-dependent binary package that contains
splitindex, and the arch=all binary package that contains
A more realistic solution would be to simply remove the precompiled
binaries from the orig.tar.gz, both of the arch=all package and of the
arch=any package. This has the additional benefit that it will never
happen that you accidently upload a version which fails to compile
splitindex, but doesn't detect that because it simply takes the
> wrong shell path:
> source/latex/wordcount/wordcount.sh #!/usr/bin/sh
Is there any sane system in the world where the POSIX shell is not in
> wront tcl path:
> source/latex/calendar/mkaddr.tcl #!/usr/local/bin/tclsh
Isn't there a tcl analogon to the magic perl header?
> I can fix these errors either in the Depot, or in the Debian diff, what
> do you think?
It doesn't matter as long as somebody pesters upstream to fix them in
their sources and on CTAn, too.
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
More information about the tex-live