On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 03:06:30PM +0200, Ruediger Meier wrote:
Hm, for my understanding we are using rpm binary packages to have more comfort and speed. If we have now thousands of texlive packages which slows down any rpm related operation and makes it more complicated for the usual user who just wants to have working tex stuff then mission has failed.
What is the benefit of having all these separate texlive rpms? I'd say the usual user will install either all or none anyway.
Smaller TeXLive installations like it upstream, Debian, and RedHat. I had several bug report in past to follow the package upstream scheme and now I've done it. IMHO rpm as well as libzypp as to be fixed to be able to do posttrans scriptlets as described in the current rpm manual. If you would use rpm standalone without zypper in *one* transaction for all texlive packages it would be much faster. The only problem is that rpm can not expand dependencies like libzypp. Beside this: ever read rpm source code, if you think about comfort and speed ;) Werner -- "Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool." -- Edward Burr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org