Raul Miller wrote lately: > > Ian Murdock: > I doubt there'll be a substantial number of architecture-neutral > packages; we can either copy or link them into all of the trees. > > I suppose this depends on what you mean by substantial... Here's a > list of packages that appear to be architecture-neutral, by cursory > examination on my system. > any package which needs to be compiled is of course not arch-independent. on my system here (sunos, not debian ;-)) at least the following are partially compiled:
> ii dvips 5.58f 2 TeX DVI-driver for Postscript > ii fort77 1.6 1 An f2c front end to make it look like a > compile > ii makeidx 2.12 Makeindex, a general purpose index processor > ii metafont 2.71 2 Metafont - TeX's font engine > ii xdvi 1.8f 2 A TeX DVI-previewer for X11 the following is even in the source not arch-independent: > ii syslinux 1.20 0 Boot disk creator. of the following i don't know (now) which files are included. some files which i call auxilary files (eg the string pool) are also arch-dependent, but they might not be included in this package. > ii mflib 1.0 5 Auxiliary files to run Metafont > ii texlib 1.0 4 Auxiliary Files to run TeX bye jjm -- Juergen Menden | Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by me, tel: +49 (89) 2051 - 2387 +-----------+ are (usually) not the opinions e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | of anyone else on this planet. Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Add me to your .signature and join in the fun!
