headers
Osamu Aoki | 1 Feb 2006 14:34
Picon
Favicon

Bug#338376: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#338376: \usepackage[force]{textcomp} side effects for debiandoc-sgml

On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 08:44:25PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Jens Seidel <jensseidel <at> users.sf.net> wrote:
> 
> > debiandoc-sgml does no longer build Debian FAQ.
> >
> > $ latex /tmp/error.tex
> > This is e-TeX, Version 3.14159-2.1 (Web2C 7.4.5)
> > entering extended mode
> 
> This is not the version in unstable, but in testing or sarge.  
> 
> Hm.  Bad if that has the effect that debiandoc-sgml cannot be backported
> to sarge withouth changes.  Is this really a problem - there are also
> other alternatives, although less elegant.

I think it is better to make debiandoc-sgml compatible with tetex 2.0
and 3.0.  If anyone propose good fix, I will use it as the next update.

Osamu
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Frank Küster | 1 Feb 2006 15:11
Picon

Bug#338376: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#338376: \usepackage[force]{textcomp} side effects for debiandoc-sgml

Osamu Aoki <osamu <at> debian.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 08:44:25PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Jens Seidel <jensseidel <at> users.sf.net> wrote:
>> 
>> > debiandoc-sgml does no longer build Debian FAQ.
>> >
>> > $ latex /tmp/error.tex
>> > This is e-TeX, Version 3.14159-2.1 (Web2C 7.4.5)
>> > entering extended mode
>> 
>> This is not the version in unstable, but in testing or sarge.  
>> 
>> Hm.  Bad if that has the effect that debiandoc-sgml cannot be backported
>> to sarge withouth changes.  Is this really a problem - there are also
>> other alternatives, although less elegant.
>
> I think it is better to make debiandoc-sgml compatible with tetex 2.0
> and 3.0.  If anyone propose good fix, I will use it as the next update.

The alternative is to drop "[force]" and use "\currency" instead of
"\textcurrency".  This will use the currency symbol from the wasy fonts
(wasysym.sty is already loaded, anyway) instead of trying Palatino's
currency symbol.  It doesn't fit smoothly into a text typeset in
Palatino, but I don't think this is a severe problem: First of all, this
symbol is only rarely used in continous text and will stand out anyway.
Second, the Palatino currency symbol looks ugly in my opinion - one can
hardly see that it's not just a circle, whereas the wasysym one is
nicer.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Frank Küster | 1 Feb 2006 17:20
Picon
Favicon

Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#338376: \usepackage[force]{textcomp} side effects for debiandoc-sgml

Frank Küster <frank <at> kuesterei.ch> wrote:

> Osamu Aoki <osamu <at> debian.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 08:44:25PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>>> Jens Seidel <jensseidel <at> users.sf.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > debiandoc-sgml does no longer build Debian FAQ.
>>> >
>>> > $ latex /tmp/error.tex
>>> > This is e-TeX, Version 3.14159-2.1 (Web2C 7.4.5)
>>> > entering extended mode
>>> 
>>> This is not the version in unstable, but in testing or sarge.  
>>> 
>>> Hm.  Bad if that has the effect that debiandoc-sgml cannot be backported
>>> to sarge withouth changes.  Is this really a problem - there are also
>>> other alternatives, although less elegant.
>>
>> I think it is better to make debiandoc-sgml compatible with tetex 2.0
>> and 3.0.  If anyone propose good fix, I will use it as the next update.
>
> The alternative is to drop "[force]" and use "\currency" instead of
> "\textcurrency".

In fact there's a much easier solution: add "force" to the global
options that you give to the documentclass (near the "11pt").  In this
case, each package will pick it if and only if it understands it; so the
textcomp problem is solved.  None of the packages loaded by
Debiandoc-sgml-Dokuments understand the option "force".  I didn't check
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Frank Küster | 2 Feb 2006 09:55
Picon
Favicon

Bug#350993: tetex-bin: Obsolete debconf questions are not purged

Package: tetex-bin
Version: 3.0-12sarge13
Severity: normal

-- debconf information:
  tetex-bin/upd_map: true
* tetex-bin/cnf_name:
  tetex-bin/fmtutil: true
  tetex-bin/fmtutil-failed:
  tetex-bin/updmap-failed:
  tetex-bin/hyphen: french[=patois], ngerman[=naustrian-neue_Rechtschreibung]
  tetex-bin/oldcfg: true
  tetex-bin/use_debconf: false

Regards, Frank

--

-- 
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding  <at>  Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX)
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Frank Küster | 2 Feb 2006 09:54
Picon
Favicon

Bug#350992: tetex-bin: Still installs files in TEXMFMAIN

Package: tetex-bin
Version: 3.0-12sarge13
Severity: normal

actually, lots of them.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10
Locale: LANG=de_DE <at> euro, LC_CTYPE=de_DE <at> euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)

Regards, Frank
--

-- 
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding  <at>  Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX)
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ralf Stubner | 2 Feb 2006 11:54
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Bug#350992: tetex-bin: Still installs files in TEXMFMAIN

Frank Küster wrote:
> Package: tetex-bin
> Version: 3.0-12sarge13
> Severity: normal
> 
> actually, lots of them.

Is that really a problem? I had the impression that the files in
TEXMFMAIN are related to the actual binaries (sort of like upstream has
it). I don't think that it is possible to achieve interoperability with
TeX Live for binary packages. And I am not sure if it where good if
other packages would shadow these files. I only had a casual look on the
files in TEXMFMAIN, though.

cheerio
ralf
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Hilmar Preusse | 2 Feb 2006 12:07
X-Face
Picon

libkpathsea3 -> libkpathsea4 transition?

Hi all,

just a reminder: are there still library transitions in progress?
IIRC there were an E-Mail on dda, that the most important stuff is
gone.
Shouldn't we start to move the package depending on libkpathsea3 to
libkpathsea4?

Thanks,
  Hilmar
--

-- 
The Gordian Maxim:
	If a string has one end, it has another.
  http://www.hilmar-preusse.de.vu/
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Ralf Stubner | 2 Feb 2006 12:00
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Where have all the bugs gone?

Hi everybody,

according to <URL:http://packages.qa.debian.org/t/tetex-base.html>,
almost all of the bugs in tetex-base have been solved? However according
to <URL:http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=tetex-base>, it
can't migrate to testing as it would make lots of packages
uninstallable. On the other hand, abntex goes in today according to
<URL:http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=abntex>, although it
has a FTBFS because of a wrong \pdfoutput test. Strange ...

cheerio
ralf
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Frank Küster | 2 Feb 2006 12:48
Picon
Favicon

Re: Where have all the bugs gone?

Ralf Stubner <ralf.stubner <at> physik.uni-erlangen.de> wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> according to <URL:http://packages.qa.debian.org/t/tetex-base.html>,
> almost all of the bugs in tetex-base have been solved? 

It seems the LDAP interface to the BTS is broken, others have also
noticed this.

Regards, Frank
--

-- 
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding  <at>  Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX)
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Frank Küster | 2 Feb 2006 12:43
Picon

Bug#350992: tetex-bin: Still installs files in TEXMFMAIN

Ralf Stubner <ralf.stubner <at> physik.uni-erlangen.de> wrote:

> Frank Küster wrote:
>> Package: tetex-bin
>> Version: 3.0-12sarge13
>> Severity: normal
>> 
>> actually, lots of them.
>
> Is that really a problem? I had the impression that the files in
> TEXMFMAIN are related to the actual binaries (sort of like upstream has
> it). I don't think that it is possible to achieve interoperability with
> TeX Live for binary packages. And I am not sure if it where good if
> other packages would shadow these files. I only had a casual look on the
> files in TEXMFMAIN, though.

You may be right, but we wrote in our policy:

,----
| The role of the trees TEXMFMAIN and TEXMFDIST in Debian differ from
| upstream's original usage. Upstream uses TEXMFMAIN for the files that
| have to match the binary executables and TEXMFDIST for other TeX input
| files that are replaced when a new texmf tarball appears; this
| distinction is not necessary on a system with a decent package
| managment system. Instead, the basic TeX packages install their files
| into their TEXMFDIST directories [1] , while TEXMFMAIN is used by TeX
| add-on packages for their files and allows them to shadow older
| versions provided by the basic TeX packages.
`----
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane