Package: tex-common Version: 0.42 Severity: normal Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Die, 12 Dez 2006, Frank Küster wrote: > >> * Decide whether TeXlive continues to work with conffile links and a >> separate /etc/texmf/texlive, or switch to the teTeX scheme, and >> implement > > I don't understand? TEXMFSYSCONFIG=/etc/texmf Consequently, the files that are now below /etc/texmf/texlive could be at their "ordinary" places instead, /etc/texmf/texlive/dvips/config.ps -> /etc/texmf/dvips/config and the symlinks removed. The current setup is a bit against the written TeX policy, but it's necessary for cooperation with tetex. Now, if we drop tetex, we can reconsider this: Either move them into their ordinary texconfig locations, or keep it and change policy. The drawback of the first (and of the way policy is written in general) is that we get the same problem again if someone packages miktex in 10 years (or so), or that we need to deal with "shared configuration files". On the other hand, if we keep them in the texlive subdirectory, the whole purpose of TEXMFSYSCONFIG is defeated. I think the long discussion about tetex's adoption of this hierarchy has shown that the issue is complex, but that all in all having and using TEXMFSYSCONFIG is better. Maybe shared configuration files are not a bad idea, I should look up the Debian Policy about that. Regards, Frank -- Dr. Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)