On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:29:00PM +0200, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> >Then how should we handle this?
> >
> >- Make openmotif a "conditional" dependency (as often done in FreeBSD's
> > ports) ?  Use it if it's already there, don't use it if not.
> >
> >- Modify the package so that it doesn't require openmotif at all?  The
> > resulting xdvi is different then, and some may prefer the openmotif
> > version.
> >
> >- Tear xdvi out and make it a package on its own?  (so that teTeX can be
> > without openmotif)
> 
> I'd go for the middle approach here for now.
> The third one means even more maintenance effort.
> The first approach (if somefile exists .include ...) would be ok with me 
> too.

Personally I like the middle on the least.  The third one was inspired
by pkgtools/pkgdephgraph not depending on graphics/graphviz anymore; you
don't always want the viewer on the same machine as the generator.  The
first approach could also be a tetex-use-openmotif option instead of a
"file exists" test.  Maybe that's the best option, it puts the user in
control without complication things too much?  Shall I generate a diff
for that?  

GH

-- 
:wq