> It is because we cannot make a port of software that is not in > TeXLive. Some localized TeX variants use non-standard software and > sometimes it conflicts ones in TeXLive for example, so a TeXLive port > as it is does not work there (the current teTeX port and the related > ports work, btw). Also, I do not want to bother people who are not > interested in using TeX itself but need to install software which > depends on TeX (not related TeX and just for typesetting a document > during the building stage, for example). I do not like an >500MB > package will be installed when I just want to install a small piece > of software. > > Supporting minimal installation is needed for these reasons. One > large package of TeXLive would make people happy for the moment, but > they would notice and suffer from issues of integration with other > ports and consistent upgrading.
Thanks for your explanation. > Do you think splitting it to small packages will be a big problem? I > realize it takes additional time, but considering pros and cons I > think it is better to do so. If you have any ideas that points to a > bad scenario, please let me know more specific. I don't have a specific example except that xorg is more painful to build and debug now if something goes wrong on my system. On one machine I have about 500 ports installed and over half of them are X related: xorg-*, x libraries, fonts etc. So the thought of 1000 additional port is quite scary! I understand you have a tough problem to solve. I just wondered if there is a simpler alternative, a way to balance flexibility with simplicity. Thanks! _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
