[tex-live] teTeX: no next release
michal at harddata.com
Tue May 30 20:30:34 CEST 2006
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.
This does makes some sense in situations when a system is
reinstalled from scratch but /home and /usr/local (and quite likely
/opt) are kept intact from the old system. Then indeed files in
/usr/local will be "orphaned" in an rpm sense; but if you are
re-installing anyway then you can reinstall "owner" packages as
well. Possibly using --justdb flag to rpm.
> and I really like to have _everything_ on my system
> under the management of RPM,
There is also an option to put these things into an /opt tree. You
are a "vendor" here in some sense. Not adding these to TEXMF tree
directly allows you to update some of original files, with a proper
search order, as TeX will use the first one found.
More information about the tex-live