Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:36:39 +0200 From: Nikola Lecic <nlecic@EUnet.yu> To: Predrag Punosevac <punosevac@math.arizona.edu> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: powerdot Message-ID: <200707250335.l6P3ZKnc025836@smtpclu-7.EUnet.yu> In-Reply-To: <46A6CE7D.5050509@math.arizona.edu> References: <46A6CE7D.5050509@math.arizona.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:15:57 -0700 Predrag Punosevac <punosevac@math.arizona.edu> wrote: > Nikola Lecic wrote: > > > > > > Nobody thinks that TeXLive shouldn't be ported :) What do you mean > > by "light version"? > > > > =20 > One of original arguments for not porting TeXLive was that the > program is simply to big > (over 1Gb). Having downloaded TeXLive (binaries only) on several=20 > occasions for my friends over DSL I can confess that that is really > the case (at least 3 hours for binaries over 1.5Mps DSL connection) . Binaries are 38M: % du -sh /usr/local/texlive/2007/bin/i386-freebsd/ 38M /usr/local/texlive/2007/bin/i386-freebsd/ (~270 binaries). texmf-dist/: common, platform-independent resources: 972M texmf-doc/: 136M > I purpose that the program be ported in the style of Gnome. Light > strip down version which would > be the minimal fully functional configuration, > "full" (English language) version with all bells, and then another > port with the support for different languages, another port Music > part of the TeXLive etc. Well, yes, of course, this is the way it was done where TeXLive was ported (OpenBSD, Debian...): as modularised as possible. > The idea of dividing the port is just > initial and should be more carefully considered by the people who > know more about various aspects of TeX that I do not use. What makes you think they are not aware of this? Nikola Le=C4=8Di=C4=87
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200707250335.l6P3ZKnc025836>