On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 06:13:30AM -0400, Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar wrote:
Quoting "Dr. Werner Fink"
: On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 05:03:13AM -0400, Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar wrote:
Quoting "Dr. Werner Fink"
: On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 11:45:50PM +0100, Alin M Elena wrote: The trick is to install texlive-bibtex8, then texlive-bibtex8-bin will be installed too. This is the natural dependency.
I haven't followed all of the conversation, but the most obvious question: What's the rational of splitting up in two packages when package a requires b to work and b requires a to work?
arch versus noarch? upstream package scheme?
sure :) valid reasons (I said I did not follow it all). arch vs non-arch though I would only consider if the space actually makes sense (are we talking MBytes or Bytes)
GBytes
Upsteram scheme i s obviously broken if they depend on each other circular... luckily not for building...
It does build not only for Debian and Fedora but now also for openSUSE
In fact TeXLive 2012 for openSUSE follows the upstream package layout. And even before the binary packages had been split from the noarch packages as the later one are only repacked and not compiled.
Following upstream layouts is a good thing! No objections there. Many advantages clearly outweigh some minor hickups here and there. And as the split is rather new, the best is to just let you know of the hickups and not to try to 'workaround them' in other spec files..
you're doing a good job on that and as we all see, you're well responsive on the issues reported! That's what is often lacking, but not in this case!
The question remains, what can be fixed in pgf. One fix I've added for pgf to make it work with plain TeX. 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-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org