> I don't want to appear an old conservative, but IMHO tetex should not > be simply replaced by texlive; they are different packages with > different purposes and characteristics, even if they share the core. I > mean: they should at least co-exist for a while in the extra > repositories, maybe with tetex flagged 'deprecated', and tetex should > be abandoned only in a year or so (maybe for the 0.9 or 0.10 iso). > They're huge packages, I don't see the point to force the users to > move from the actual fine running tetex. Me, for exemple, I would not > test texlive until I'm done with my thesis ;) > Marco I thought being "an old conservative" was contrary to the Arch Way ;-)
No seriously, I fully agree! tetex should indeed continue to be offered alongside texlive for a while (in the eventuality we indeed decide to package the latter). (Note that in principle it is possible to have both tetex and texlive on the same machine, but that would involve some twiddling around...) And yes, the whole of TeXLive is really large. Being an aficionado I have installed virtually the whole thing, so my /opt/texlive2005/ directory contains roughly 1GB of data! But I doubt very much whether many of you would do the same... You should know however that if we package TeXLive2007 in a way similar to what Debian did with the 2005 release, the whole thing would be split into 79 packages, so it would be possible to install just a few of them to have approximately the equivalent of tetex in terms of size and functionality. And good luck with your thesis Marco! (I also did mine with latex, and it was later published as a book, so in such situation it is a blessing to be able to provide a finely typeset camera-ready copy to the publisher :-) Francois _______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
