[tex-live] teTeX: no next release

[Dr. Werner Fink]

On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 07:14:17PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Michal Jaegermann <michal at harddata.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 02:22:01AM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
> >> The intention was provide a way for addon packages and updates to be
> >> installed. As an RPM should never own any file in /usr/local (where RH
> >> puts TEXMFLOCAL)
> >
> > Why not?  Is any layout document somewhere which specifies such
> > restriction?  'rpm' itself defintely does not have such limitation.
> 
> The Linux Filesystem Hierarchy Standard:
> 
> ,---- http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#THEUSRHIERARCHY
> | The following directories, or symbolic links to directories, are
> | required in /usr.
> | 
> | Directory	Description
> | [...]
> | local         Local hierarchy (empty after main installation)
> `----

Yep, I'm remembering that it was always a lot of work to get teTeX
fully Filesystem Hierarchy Standard[1] compatible.  Which is simply
all configuration should be located at /etc/texmf/, all variable
data should be located at /var/lib/texmf/ and /var/cache/fonts/
for fonts, all static and independed data should be located at
/usr/share/texmf/.  Note that /usr/ could be mounted read only
accordingly to the FHS and even if, the teTeX setup has to work
flawless.  This reqires that e.g. the ls-R files within
/usr/share/texmf/ are symbolic links which points into /var/lib/texmf/.

Beside this I use a subdirectory teTeX/ in /usr/share/texmf/ for
the binaries in teTeX/bin/<arch>/ and the manual and info pages.
This because this enables me to export all of this via NFS.  Clearly
the stuff is included with symbolic links into the standard
execution, info and manual paths.


       Werner

[1] : http://www.pathname.com/fhs/
      http://freestandards.org/spec/refspecs/LSB_3.1.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/execenvfhs.html
-- 
  "Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
          a peeing section in a swimming pool." -- Edward Burr