Nikola Lečić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
ni> On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:02:45 +0900 (JST) ni> Hiroki Sato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ni> ni> [...] ni> > I realize it takes additional time, but considering pros and cons I ni> > think it is better to do so. ni> ni> Sorry for interrupting the dialogue, are we speaking of ~1.000 ports? ni> Personally, as a future heavy user of TeXLive port, I'd like to see it ni> as modularised as possible, just like X.org. Can you maybe post here ni> just a list of future ports before you public a full tree for testing? You can find the list in TeXLive distribution's texmf*/tpm directories because I am working based on the *.tpm files there. From simple splitting based on them, about 1,200 ports will be obtained. TeXLive distribution itself includes >40,000 files, the number should not be a surprising one. ni> If it's not possible, does this mean that every, e.g. LaTeX .sty ni> package is a separate port? And, e.g. that ConTeXt is a port (or more Yes. I am trying to do so as much as possible. -- | Hiroki SATO
pgpdNtY4EjzUb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
