[Debian-in-workers] Bug#717636: Bug#717636: latex-sanskrit package

[Vasudev Kamath]

Hi,

Vasudev Kamath <kamathvasudev at gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 5:04 PM, intrigeri <intrigeri at debian.org> wrote:
>> On current sid, with texlive-lang-indic installed:
>>
>> $ t1disasm /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/sanskrit/sktb10.pfb  | grep start
>> dup 3 {systemdict /internaldict known not {pop 3} {1183615869
>> systemdict /internaldict get exec dup /startlock known {/startlock
>> get exec} {dup /strtlck known {/strtlck get exec} {pop 3} ifelse}
>> ifelse} ifelse} executeonly put
>>
>> ... seems to indicate that the bug is still present.
>>
>> Did I miss anything, or are we misunderstanding each other?
>
> Below is mail snippet between me Jaldhar and Norbert, probably
> recorded in texlive mailing list.
> ===========================================================================
> Hi Vasudev,
>
>> We (me and Jaldhar) are planning to drop the latex-sanskrit package from
>
> Ok.
>
>> Can you please drop the latex-sanskrit from depends/recommends of above
>> package in your next release?..
>
> Sure. We will re-include the "sanskrit" part of TeX Live which
> only ships the mf /pfb files and the source of the preprocessor.
>
>> Also I will file bug on above 3 packages if needed, I thought I will
>> first contact you guys before filing bug. Please let me know your
>> thoughts on this.
>
> There is one thing we should think about: Transition for users of
> latex-sanskrit.
>
> If you think it is fine to drop the package completely without
> any upgrade path, that is fine with me.
>
> Otherwise we could build a transitional package "latex-sanskrit"
> from texlive-lang that just depends on
>         texlive-lang-indic
> and be gone.
>
> That way you don't have to request removal either, since it is
> just a change of maintainer, and at the end will be removed
> at some point.
>
> Let me know your opinion and I will implement it for TL 2014,
> (which will probably never enter Debian if we don't get a new libpng)
> ===================================================================
>
> We acked to drop binaries and only ship required source as part of
> texlive-lang-indic. So yes the bug still holds right but not sure if
> it should be reassigned to texlive-lang src or kept on latex-sanskrit.
> Also bug is ignored for jessie!.
>
> Sorry for not including this earlier conversation. I had to re-read it
> to understand the concept

Any thing on this? Did I clarify? or any further clarification needed
From my side?

-- 
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja at samsargika.copyninja.info
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4  C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-in-workers/attachments/20141027/b33aaef3/attachment.sig>