[arch-general] texlive (again?)

Jan Spakula jan.spakula at gmx.com
Mon Apr 21 10:46:08 EDT 2008

Excerpts from Thomas Bächler's message of Mon Apr 21 04:45:06 -0500 2008:
> Thomas Bächler schrieb:
> > We could make sure that either these packages depend on a virtual "tex" 
> > package that is provided by texlive or make texlive provide tetex.
> Ha! texlive-core already provides tetex. Therefore, you can use all 
> applications that depend on tetex with texlive instead. This situation 
> is good enough for me.

I'm relatively content with the situation as well (with using texlive
and all). [I'm fed up with people bitching about this on the forum, so I
decided to try to bring it up.] The thing is that now people need to
know in the first place that they should/could want to use texlive,
since if they just install something that needs tex, it pulls
automatically tetex. That's essentially the "issue" I'm trying to
I guess a cheap way out which would make me happy would be to at least
add a line saying 
"This tex distribution is currently unmaintaned upstream,
there is an alternative (texlive) in the community repo."
in tetex's install script.

 Jan Spakula

More information about the arch-general mailing list