Subject: bug#27217: texlive is too big

From: Pierre Neidhardt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 13:51:20 +0100

> “mflogo” appears to be a different thing though, it doesn’t contain the
> font.  I found the ‘logo’ font in ‘texlive-fonts-knuth-lib’ though!
> 
> Now I can’t find the ‘pplr’ font (actually Adobe’s Palatino).

Ran into the same confusion.  All this is specified in the tlpdb, but even there
the difference between mflogo and mflogo-font is confusing: they are two
different packages, but they are just one package... (?)

> I wouldn’t say it’s useless.  Although I’m certainly prone to writing
> useless code, this importer serves a need and allowed me to successfully
> create the many texlive-* packages we have now.
> 
> I’ll admit, though, that it’s the one importer that I like the least :)

I'm so sorry for the poor wording, Ricardo, it was uncalled for.  (Wrote in a
haste.)  What I meant is that it does not solve the current issue of "what file
belongs to what package."

It's not just the importer but our current approach to TeXlive that we've got to
work out.

Again, sorry for the offensive statement, I hope you didn't take offense, none
was intended.

> : I'm more and more convinced that rewriting the texlive-build-system centered
> : around texlive.tlpdb would work and is the right approach.
> 
> Could you please outline what this would mean?

Sure: if you look at the file, you'll see it's a textual database of all
packages with their respective file.  A possible solution that we could
implement either as a build-system or an importer: lookup the package in the tlpdb
(e.g. mflogo) and package all the corresponding file from the svn repo.  Sounds
simple enough.  What do you think?