On 25/09/2007, Tom spot Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 17:49 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> On 24 Sep 2007 10:24:29 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu>
> > >>>>> "TK" == Toshio Kuratomi
> > TK> +1 to making the prefix tex-
> > +1 here as well.
> And me.
> Can we also consider adding some virtual provides for making add-on
> packages TeX distribution agnostic.
I don't know TeX from a hole in the ground. If you know better, please
draft guidelines for it. As long as they don't seem to have come from a
haze of bong smoke, we'll probably sign off on them. Deferring to those
who know what they're talking about is our secret to success. :)
Well, some early proposals are here:
Basically, have texlive-bin Provides: TeX such that add-ons can
Require: TeX. That way, if someone needs to install a different
(La)TeX distribution than TeXLive (others do exist), she can still use
the add-on packages (where it makes sense to do so. Depending on how
texlive eventualy ends up being packaged, it may be that we want to
add more fine grained virtual provides, eg tex, latex, tex-dvips,
tex-pdflatex etc etc. This really needs to be done in consideration of
the packaging strategy of texlive though. Input from Jindrich would be
Fedora-packaging mailing list