[Bug 190071] Review Request: dvipost - latex post filter command

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat May 6 06:41:38 UTC 2006


Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: dvipost - latex post filter command


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190071


jamatos at fc.up.pt changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |NEXTRELEASE




------- Additional Comments From jamatos at fc.up.pt  2006-05-06 02:41 EST -------
(In reply to comment #15)
> Some comments:
> 
> * %post -p /usr/bin/texhash
> 
> will automatically add 
> Requires(post) /usr/bin/texhash

  Right.

> So I think the explicit dependency on tetex-fonts is not really right 
> as it may change in the future.

  OK.

> * A dependence on kpsewhich should be there, however, in my opinion:
> BuildRequires: /usr/bin/kpsewhich

  Done.

> * In my opinion the following should be used to detect %_texmf, since
> in configure kpsewhich is also used (even though a bit differently
> but I believe the result is the same)
> %{!?_texmf: %define _texmf %(eval "echo 
`kpsewhich -expand-var '$TEXMFMAIN'`")}

  I agree, we should probably harmonize this in rules for tetex derived 
packages. Reading other tetex-* packages both ways are used.

> * the tetex package is picked up by tetex-latex, so I think that 
> the dependencies on tetex should be removed.

  I knew that. :-)
  I removed it.

  The changes have been commited to CVS but I don't think the changes require 
a new build.

  The package build cleanly for all branches so I will close this bug.
  The package build cleanly, so 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list