Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 189753
preview is removed from tetex, but documentation remains packaged
Last modified: 2013-07-02 19:15:59 EDT
Description of problem: Following bug #168859, preview was removed from the tetex package. However, the documentation files are still packaged in /usr/share/texmf/doc/latex/preview. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): tetex-doc-3.0-17 How reproducible: Every time Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install tetex-doc 2. 3. Actual results: Documentation for preview.sty is installed Expected results: No documentation for preview.sty Additional info:
Note: This is rather a problem for the AUCTeX rpm in Fedora Extras. preview-latex now ships as part of AUCTeX, but we can't enable preview-latex as it will install the preview documentation in the directory I mention above, and so tetex and auctex rpms will stomp on each others files. This is therefore blocking updating the auctex package to install preview. Your attention to this would be very well received. :)
Yes, thanks for pointing this out. I removed preview documentation from the latest devel tetex.
Jindrich - thank you. The question now is whether an update should be shipped for FC5. On the one hand, this would seem silly, since a rather large rpm would need to be downloaded just to remove those few files. However, if we ship the updated auctex package from Extras, that will overwrite the files from tetex-doc, and then when/if tetex-doc is updated I fear that will then remove the files installed from auctex. What do you suggest?
I have many changes gathered since the FC5 release, mostly related to outdated styles and Japanese support so that it's IMO the right time to release an update for FC5 soon, what also resolves the problem with auctex.
tetex-3.0-19.fc5 has been pushed for fc5, which should resolve this issue. If these problems are still present in this version, then please make note of it in this bug report.
tetex-3.0-10.FC4 has been pushed for fc4, which should resolve this issue. If these problems are still present in this version, then please make note of it in this bug report.