Hi, I should always go riding my bike *before* writing long e-mails. I always get the best ideas when moving my legs.
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > a) Either remove all problematic files from the orig.tar.gz right now, > with the option to add them again later [...] > The good thing about (a) is that any possible breakage in other packages > (e.g. packages that need non-free components for the build process) have > good chances to be detected, while some might slip into etch with option > (b). On the other hand, option (a) is not in the interest of our users, > and/or the release process: > > - if we do not re-add files that turn out to be free, they will be > missing in etch, which doesn't serve our users, [...] > [1] TeXLive is probably equally affected What about option c: - Remove all problematic files at once from tetex-base's orig.tar.gz, - but keep them installed with texlive until somewhen at (release - n weeks), n=2,3 - state that bugs that affect texlive's ability to be used as a teTeX replacement may be NMU'ed. These bugs are in most cases just Depends: lines that only mention teTeX and do not allow texlive as an alternative. Among the packages any texlive package conflicts with, there might be some more. Some other conflicts just indicate that the package is not up-to-date, and texlive installs the newer version contained by upstream. Norbert? This is the list of conflicted-on packages: circ-tex dviutils ethiop ivritex lacheck latex-beamer latex-svninfo latex-ucs latex-ucs-contrib latex-ucs-uninames latex-xcolor lhs2tex octave-forge pbox-tex pdfscreen pgf ptex-bin rcs-latex tex-chess tex-skak textopo Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
