On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 05:26:25PM +0000, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > 2009/10/29 Jindrich Novy <jnovy@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > Currently I'm trying to not to replace any package that has a separate > > upstream and is already packaged separatelly in Fedora. > > > > IMO I think we'd be better off adopting the texlive versions of the > packages, rather than doing a half-and-half job on this by packaging > individual upstreams. The reason being that Fedora then benefits from > the integration and testing work done by the texlive team. The texlive > xdvipdfmx, for example is (I think), ahead of the 0.4 "upstream" > release. > > J. Ok, no problem with obsoleting a Fedora package with a TeX Live variant if you, as a package maintainer of it, wish to. I will add Obsoletes for xdvipdfmx. I'm presenting a complete list of packages shipped in TeX Live to discuss another possible obsoletions: dvipdfm dvipdfmx getafm lcdftypetools psutils t1utils xdvi dvipng xdvipdfmx If you think that also some of these packages in Fedora should be obsoleted, please let me know and I will do so in the next TL repo update. Thanks, Jindrich -- Jindrich Novy <jnovy@xxxxxxxxxx> http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/ -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
