RFP: texmf

[Robert Collins]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan Nieuwenhuizen" <janneke@gnu.org>


> How long would it take to phase them out?  A fresh setup.ini that
> doesn't mention tetex-beta would make tetex-beta invisible?  Hmm, but
> then we'd need a 'conflicts:' setup hint or so, and locally cached
> setup.ini's could generate trouble.

The package will not disappear if it's not in setup.ini. It's still
present in installed.db. The _only_ way to force an uninstall of a
package is when we support conflicts: which will come AFTER we support
package-dependency-install-oredering (Which BTW allows the installation
of an empty package to replace the old one as a safe upgrade path).

> Anyway, the best part is the fact that tetex-beta/bin gets a rebuild,
> and we're talking.  Of course, the renaming should be a bonus, not a
> pain.

Yes.

> And it would need some testing too.  Phasing-out packages will be a
> needed feature at some point, but maybe not highest priority now.
> What about pre/postremove scripts, eg?

Testing? Thats what the end users do isn't it :}

Rob