On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 14 Mai 2012, Ralf Stubner wrote:
>> the actual texpower code now resides in tl-latex-extra. However, I
>> think tl-fonts-recommend is still sufficient for texpower.
>
> tlpslifonts is in extra.
I stand corrected.
cheerio
ralf
On Mo, 14 Mai 2012, Ralf Stubner wrote:
> the actual texpower code now resides in tl-latex-extra. However, I
> think tl-fonts-recommend is still sufficient for texpower.
tlpslifonts is in extra.
Best wishes
Norbert
Norbert
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 7:47 PM, David Starner wrote:
> texlive-fonts-extra-doc is 68 MB, which is nothing to sneeze at, but
> the ultimate problem here is that texpower depends (not recommends) on
> texlive-fonts-extra, which is almost 400 MB.
That does look unnecessary, indeed. In wheezy, texpo
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> You probably didn't set 'Install-Recommends "false"'; in your
> apt.conf. Hence apt tries to install also the recommended packages
> and we have set the doc packages to recommended. Yes, these doc
> packages are quite large, a minimal TL inst
On 12.05.12 David Starner (prosfil...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Hi,
> > Because texpower is now built from texlive and this is the only
> > solution you get a in-place upgrade. (texpower is empty, just
> > depending on texlive-latex-extra which c
On Sa, 12 Mai 2012, David Starner wrote:
> this really suddenly need texlive-fonts-extra? And does a 400MB
> package made up of 150 CTAN packages really need to exist?
You dind'nt understand the point...
36K texlive_2011.20120511-1_all.deb
14M texlive-base_2011.20120511-1_all.deb
25M t
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Norbert Preining wrote:
> BTW, why do you complain? To use texpower you *anyway* need TeX?
> So it will be installed *anyway*. And if you don't want, don't
> install the documentation, and it will be much leaner.
Why do I complain? Because one day I was upgrading
On Fr, 11 Mai 2012, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> [ NB: I am only the former texpower maintainer, no idea why the BTS sent that
> to me
> anyways, as it (at least now) now knows the new one ]
I have seen this problem recently a few times, it is a pain, and
a bug in the BTS I think
Best wishes
No
On Sa, 12 Mai 2012, David Starner wrote:
> stand-alone component under 1 MB that can't be installed without
> adding 450 MB of other stuff, perhaps it's time for more fine-grained
> dependencies.
Hahahaha - we split TeX LIve already in 50 or more packages ...
I proposed a complete splitting in th
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 01:06:43AM -0700, David Starner wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Because texpower is now built from texlive and this is the
> > only solution you get a in-place upgrade. (texpower is empty, just depending
> > on texlive-latex-extra which c
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Because texpower is now built from texlive and this is the
> only solution you get a in-place upgrade. (texpower is empty, just depending
> on texlive-latex-extra which contains texpower)
That isn't the only solution. There's not one monoli
[ NB: I am only the former texpower maintainer, no idea why the BTS sent that
to me
anyways, as it (at least now) now knows the new one ]
Hi,
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 07:16:05AM -0700, David Starner wrote:
> texpower, in testing, has an installed size of 387 KB. If you look at
... when it still
Package: texpower
Version: 2011.20120509-1
texpower, in testing, has an installed size of 387 KB. If you look at
command lines below, to upgrade to the new texpower is going to take
over 450 MB. I was considering making this wishlist, but this 1000x
fold increase in effective size takes a program
13 matches
Mail list logo
