From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux ppc; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 Epiphany/1.6.1 Description of problem: The xmltex package does not require passivetex. However, without passivetex, xmltex will not work. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): xmltex-20020625-5 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: Execute "pdfxmltex docbook.fo." Actual Results: This is pdfeTeX, Version 3.141592-1.21a-2.2 (Web2C 7.5.4) entering extended mode (./docbook.fo LaTeX2e <2003/12/01> Babel <v3.8d> and hyphenation patterns for american, french, german, ngerman, b ahasa, basque, bulgarian, catalan, croatian, czech, danish, dutch, esperanto, e stonian, finnish, greek, icelandic, irish, italian, latin, magyar, norsk, polis h, portuges, romanian, russian, serbian, slovak, slovene, spanish, swedish, tur kish, ukrainian, nohyphenation, loaded. xmltex version: 2002/06/25 v1.9 (Exp): (/usr/share/texmf/tex/xmltex/xmltex.cfg) No File: docbook.cfg ! LaTeX Error: File `fotex.xmt' not found. Type X to quit or <RETURN> to proceed, or enter new name. (Default extension: xmt) Expected Results: If passivetex is installed, pdfxmltex works fine. Additional info:
You have it backwards: it is passivetex that requires xmltex (and the RPM is tagged appropriately). It is similar to the relationship between latex and tex.
I am not following your logic. LaTeX requires TeX. If I have a LaTeX document, then as a user I would know to "yum install tetex-latex" because tetex-latex processes LaTeX documents. Tetex-latex would bring in tetex and the result would be a working latex program. But consider the case of xmltex. If I had a FO document that I wanted to process, then I would do a "yum install xmltex" because pdfxmltex processes these documents. But I would be left with a broken xmltex because passivetex would not be installed. Granted, tetex-latex and passivetex are both a collection of TeX macros. But tetex-latex also contains the program latex -- passivetex does not contain the program pdfxmltex.
The point stands: xmltex does not, of itself, require passivetex. Putting such a dependency in the RPM is incorrect. If you don't like the tex/latex analogy, try xsltproc/docbook-style-xsl. Should libxslt require the DocBook stylesheets? (No, it shouldn't.) FWIW, you probably should run "yum install xmlto" anyway. :-)
Okay, you got me. Thanks, Tim.