On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Predrag Punosevac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One could also argue that much finer TeXLive port could have been done as > certain parts of TeXLive experience rapid > development.
I think that would be making work for the sake of it. TeXLive release once a year, so thats when I will make ports. One could commit thier entire life to maintaining TeXLive in a granular fashion, but I don't have time or motivation to do so. TeXLive is not easy to manage. It took me the best part of half a year to understand the various mechanisms (maps, formats, pools etc.) and patch away parts of the builld system that prevented DESTDIR to be used properly. I have a ruby script which I use to split down the texmf tree into subsets which I have re-written from scratch this year because the internal tex database format changed from XML to text (which is a good thing). I will be breaking texlive down slightly more this year in an attempt to remove the ruby/imagemagick deps for non-conTeXt users, and the structure of the port may change from SUBDIR, to something else. I hope this gives you an insight. -- Best Regards Edd http://students.dec.bournemouth.ac.uk/ebarrett
