[xml/sgml-pkgs] Bug#311557: appears to be present in 1.9-9 (sid) only

Francesco Paolo Lovergine Francesco Paolo Lovergine <frankie@debian.org>, 311557@bugs.debian.org
Thu, 2 Jun 2005 08:28:40 +0200

On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 08:01:37PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Well, this bug is now merged with 262395, but they seem to be opposite sides
> of the same bugfix; the dependency on efmt is a result of the changes in
> 1.9-9 that were supposed to fix 262395/306595.
> I don't really know anything about fmtutil (other than that it's a chronic
> RC irritant).  What's the variable here that causes some systems to need
> .fmt and some to need .efmt?  It doesn't seem to be the version of tetex
> packages installed, at least.
> Supposing for the moment we're out of time before release, which version
> would we want to go with -- the 1.9-8 version that assumes .fmt, or the
> 1.9-9 version that assumes .efmt?

AFAIK the choice of enhanced or normal tex engine is related to the use of 
the new NTS primitives, so it's due to the specific sheet (xmltex in
this case). Tetex is compatible with both engines, and there are other
sheets that use just one of them or both. Someone who knows better
the inner requirements of xmltex should have a guess... I'm a poor
texnician, not a wizard :) I can just guess that probably etex is the
way to go, but postinst needs a decent fix as suggested in my previous
followups, in any case.

Francesco P. Lovergine