[Bug 229180] Review Request: texlive-texmf - Architecture independent parts of the TeX formatting system

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf - Architecture independent parts of the TeX formatting system


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229180





------- Additional Comments From jnovy@xxxxxxxxxx  2007-09-18 10:25 EST -------
(In reply to comment #42)
> I propose the following additions to the texmf substitutions:
> %{__sed} -i 's?^TEXMF =.*?TEXMF =
>
{$TEXMFCONFIG,$TEXMFVAR,$TEXMFHOME,$TEXMFSYSCONFIG,!!$TEXMFSYSVAR,!!$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFDIST}?'
> %{__sed} -i 's?^TEXMFLOCAL =.*?TEXMFLOCAL = %{_texmf_local}?'

Could you be more verbose on these substitutions?

> There is a -p missing for the first install.

There were two missing '-p's actually, added.

> in the tkdefaults patch, the defaults should be like in texlive
> and the appropriate Requires set.

I don't think so, the defaults there should match Fedora, so that it has to be
tuned appropriatelly.

> Instead of doing a link for the cmap ghostscript resources
> I think that the texmf.cnf should be changed.

Please provide a patch for this.

> Also I think that 
> # move the configuration files and symlink them
> is wrong. Better leave as is.

I don't think so. Storing config files to /etc is perfectly fine IMO.

> mktex.cnf should certainly be under the sole user 
> control, and in /etc/texmf/web2c

Moved.

> The common package may also be called texlive-common
> and it should certainly be in Requires for more packages, for
> example texlive, texlive-fonts, texlive-dvips, xdvi, mendexk, 
> dvipdfmx.

I decided to remove the common package as it's useless and moved bits from there
to the main package.

> The install-info should not have .gz and have || :.

Indeed, added.

> The scriptlet commands should be in Requires(...). I hope
> that rpm can figure out that the binary package has in fact to
> be installed before the texmf package to be able to run the 
> scriptlet.
> 
> Also it seems to me that at least updmap should be run as a 
> texmf package scriptlet, and not as the main package scriptlet, 
> since all that updmap needs is in the texmf packages, including
> the config file.

Seems reasonable, please provide patch.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]