Re: dh_installtex just for calling mktexlsr?

2006-03-30 Thread Florent Rougon
[ Uh, do we really need debian-devel here? ]

Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 masters of dh_installtex,

That's Norbert. ;-)

 The drawback is that update-updmap, update-language and update-fmtutil
 are called whereas my package does not need them (and that mktexlsr is
 called without any argument, so all dirs are checked).

Just a data point: running update-updmap, update-language and
update-fmtutil is very cheap (contrary to running e.g. updmap-sys).

 I'm not familiar with dh_installtex code - would it be easy to add an
 option, so that only the mktexlsr call is introduced into maintainer
 scripts?  Should we provide an option to add directories to the mktexlsr
 call, so that only the directories where files have been installed are
 updated?  This could speed up things considerably, and there's no need

You mean add these directories manually, right? Because the general case
is not that simple. It is not sufficient to run mktexlsr on directories
where files are installed, because files can also be moved to a
different place under TEXMFMAIN, or simply removed, and these need to
disappear from ls-R.

-- 
Florent


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



dh_installtex just for calling mktexlsr? (was: Bug#358695: ITP: latex-utils -- utilities for LaTeX/xfig)

2006-03-29 Thread Frank Küster
Hi, 

masters of dh_installtex,

Vincent Danjean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Frank Küster wrote:
 Vincent Danjean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 I only have a few .sty that I cuurently install in
 /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/latex-utils/ (will be latex-compile/)
 And in my postinst, I use dh_installtex
 
 Do you need to register map files, new formats, and new languages
 with TeX?  That's the purpose of dh_installtex.  Otherwise just call
 mktexlsr (or mktexlsr /usr/share/texmf/ if you install only there).

 I just need to call mktexlsr. Previously (the package exists for a long
 time even if it was not in Debian), I called manually mktexlsr.
 Then, I switched to dh_installtex that installs several sanity checks
 (is libkpathsea configured ?, ...)
 The drawback is that update-updmap, update-language and update-fmtutil
 are called whereas my package does not need them (and that mktexlsr is
 called without any argument, so all dirs are checked).

 I would prefer to stick with dh_installtex (so that improvment in this
 script will automatically benefit to my package). But if you think it is
 not a good think, I will go back with manual invocation of
 dh_installtex.

Hm, I think that it's good to have those checks, but only if they are
needed.  They are not needed if you depend on tetex-bin |
texlive-base-bin, since in this case it's guaranteed that mktexlsr
actually works (libkpathsea is configured etc.).  But there may be
packages which install TeX input files, but do not depend on a TeX
system (instead only Recommend or Suggest).

 Another possibility would be to improve dh_installtex, so that it better
 manages simple latex package. Perhaps new options to remove
 update-updmap, update-language and/or update-fmtutil calls. And a scan
 of the package to call mktexlsr only on directories present in the
 package. Would you be interested by this kind of developments ?

I'm not familiar with dh_installtex code - would it be easy to add an
option, so that only the mktexlsr call is introduced into maintainer
scripts?  Should we provide an option to add directories to the mktexlsr
call, so that only the directories where files have been installed are
updated?  This could speed up things considerably, and there's no need
to update the font cache or TEXMFSITE, or a possibly large TEXMFLOCAL
when installing a couple of files in TEXMFMAIN.

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX)