[Fedora-packaging] Texlive packaging and "Errata packages"

Jindrich Novy jnovy at redhat.com
Tue Aug 7 07:51:12 UTC 2007

On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 08:54:45PM -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 00:31 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 11:28:38PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> > > I know Rex Dieter likes the errata package idea. I wonder what others think?
> > 
> > I think that such decisions should be left to the packagers, as long as
> > it is not obviously wrong. A bit like split choices.
> Hey, OOo dictionaries are big... let's make errata packages for them
> differently for updates.  Maybe for the data for $game, too.
> ...
> I think that this is a pretty bad idea for us to follow down.  Much like
> we package perl modules natively rather than telling people to use CPAN,
> we should be handling updates to packages natively rather than errata
> packages that stand along-side.  If the argument is size and space, then
> help out with testing presto and getting the support into the
> buildsystem so that we can have it enabled by default and helping for
> *all* packages rather than just a select few that have built their own
> way of doing things

You miss the point here. It's not about introducing a new packaging paradigm,
that other packagers should adopt. It's solely for the texlive packaging purpose in
the current state of texlive and the buildsystem. Presto is most likely useless here as
many files in the noarch packages are configs/ghosted and are expected to be
modified by the regular usage, so deltarpm wouldn't help here and it would
download the full packages anyway in many cases.


Jindrich Novy <jnovy at redhat.com>   http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list