[Pkg-lyx-devel] Re: dvipost (hopefully) ready for Debian

[Per Olofsson]

Matej Cepl:
> Per Olofsson wrote:
> > * It should be possible to have TeXlive installed instead of teTex. It
> >   should probably depend on tetex-bin | texlive-base-bin or something.
> 
> I am not sure what to do about this.

Why not just depend on "tetex-bin | texlive-base-bin"?

> I have tried to look at the package
> which seems similar to dvipost (dvipsk-ja), and they Depends: on
> libc6 (>= 2.3.5-1), libkpathsea4, tetex-bin (>= 3.0), tetex-base

Which is wrong and is reported in bug #357199.

> We probably don't need libkpathsea4,

No, because it is a shared library and dvipost does not link against
it.

> but my feeling is that I would rather have tex-common (or
> tetex-base|texlive-base), but it seems to me that tex-common is
> meant as the lowest common denominator of TeX-related packages.

No, it is a common package. It contains things which can be shared
between different TeX implementations.

> Can you chime in something authoritative from Debian TeX policy (with
> reference to the section), please?

I don't quite see the problem.

> Is there anybody who uses groff for generating DVI files with dvipost
> commands (I don't know if it is possible at all, but that's the only
> possible reason I can imagine why would somebody install dvipost without
> TeX)?

You could have a dvi file sent to you and then run dvipost on it. But
I don't actually expect people to do this, so nevermind.

> I was not able to make head and toes of dh_installtex. We probably need just
> to install dvipost.sty to $TEXMF/tex/latex/dvipost. From the little I was
> able to find in Debian TeX policy, it seems to me that dh_installtex is
> recommended, not required. Is it correct?

Yes, I was wrong. dh_installtex is not the right tool.

> > * Do you really need to create those directories listed in
> >   debian/dirs?
> 
> Yeah, we do need debian/dirs -- upstream is generated and doesn't install
> into other prefix than /usr well. Instead of fighting autoconf & co. I will
> rather have debian/dirs file. If you know how to fix Makefile.in go ahead
> and do it.

Right, I thought it used automake. Sorry.

> I did put tetex-bin into Build-Depends and made note to TODO.Debian, that we
> should find a better solution.

I'm a bit hesitant to upload the package with that build-dep. I'd
rather not force the buildd's to install TeX to build such a small
package. But it's not a big deal.

-- 
Pelle