Bug 428489
Summary: | kpathsea has a massive dependency chain, pulls in half of X | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jonathan Underwood <jonathan.underwood> |
Component: | texlive | Assignee: | Jindrich Novy <jnovy> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | pertusus, pknirsch, zcerza |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2008-02-29 13:55:15 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 428509, 429811 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Jonathan Underwood
2008-01-12 01:37:57 UTC
You are only seing the dependencies of texlive. Indeed, kpathsea depends on texlive because the library call programs from texlive. And kpathsea-devel depends on kpathsea. Maybe texlive shouldn't depend on X, but this is not a kpathsea issue as such. texlive depends directly on libX11 and libXt. ghostscript depends on libICE libSM libXext libXt. The htmlview and gtk dependencies look less clean to me. Yes, I understand the texlive dependencies, but not eg. ruby, cairo, gtk etc etc. I think we need to work out which parts of texlive are pulling in X and put those into subpackages. This *might* be due to the fact that currently xdvi is built as part of texlive (which I am working to change by packaging it separately), but that isn't being pulled in as a dependency anyway, so something else is pulling in X... question is what. ruby is also normal, context uses ruby. But indeed you are right about the gtk deps should be avoided. The issue is not xdvi, it is in a subpackage. The libX11 and libXt dependencies are pulled in because of metafont (mf) binary, which allows to use graphics. Since mktexpk and other scripts using metafont use mf-nowin which doesn't support graphics for apparent reasons I'm about to move mf with graphics support to a subpackage to have only a core functionality in the baseline texlive package without unnecessary dependency bloat: $ ldd -r mf | grep libX libXt.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libXt.so.6 (0x0000003e22000000) libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libX11.so.6 (0x0000003e16600000) libXau.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libXau.so.6 (0x0000003284600000) libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libXdmcp.so.6 (0x0000003284200000) I think that it doesn't make sense if you don't exclude the ghostscript dependencies too. Or ghostscript is split (if it is possible). Hmm, maybe we should then look more into what scripts particularly need ghostscript and focus on a possibility to package them in a subpackage. *** Bug 429753 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** The packaging modification of the baseline texlive package is in progress already. The main ideas are to package xetex in texlive-xetex (removed dependency on teckit-devel, dvipdfmx), packaging stuff using ghostscript and metafont with X support in texlive-utils (removing dependendencies on X, Perl), also we should consider Requires: mendex as it's not needed by anything in texlive and is kept for a sole purpose of tetex compatibility. Also we could move dvips utilities such as "allneeded" and "allcm" to dvips to get rid of the texlive-dvips requires. These changes should be ready for commit during today. Main dependency polluters are: poppler - packages libpoppler and libpoppler-glib in a single package what pulls in dependencies on libgdk-x11, libgdk_pixbuf, libjpeg, libpango, libpangocairo and all libglib stack (#428509) tex-preview - useless ghostscript dependency (#429811) xdg-utils - depends on desktop-file-utils, which depend on libglib -> likely unavoidable, because the original sources use glib, the only way how to get rid of these dependencies is not use xdg-utils. (In reply to comment #9) > xdg-utils - depends on desktop-file-utils, which depend on libglib -> likely > unavoidable, because the original sources use glib, the only way how to get rid > of these dependencies is not use xdg-utils. It seems to me that xdg-utils should only be a dependency of texlive-doc. (In reply to comment #8) > The packaging modification of the baseline texlive package is in progress > already. The main ideas are to package xetex in texlive-xetex (removed > dependency on teckit-devel, dvipdfmx), packaging stuff using ghostscript and > metafont with X support in texlive-utils (removing dependendencies on X, Perl), > also we should consider Requires: mendex as it's not needed by anything in > texlive and is kept for a sole purpose of tetex compatibility. Also we could > move dvips utilities such as "allneeded" and "allcm" to dvips to get rid of the > texlive-dvips requires. > > These changes should be ready for commit during today. Looks like a very good plan. I doubt it will solve the evince issue, though. It should be fine now, after poppler/poppler-glib split and texlive(-texmf) subpackaging. For more info: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-February/msg01825.html There is still the xdg-utils which should be, in my opinion, Required by texlive-doc only. Also texlive-texmf-fonts has still: # required for dvipdfmx Requires: ghostscript It seems to be for the cmap files. Maybe ghostscript should be a direct requires for dvipdfmx, such that it isn't needed by texlive? The current version of the separate dvipdfmx package does Requires: ghostrcript, if that helps. Applied, thanks! |