* David Kastrup (2005-07-21) writes: > Ralf Angeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I'm mostly with you. But what use are tex-mik.el and tex-fptex.el in >> a Unix-style environment? > > Completeness,
I wouldn't consider an AUCTeX installation on a Unix-style stystem incomplete if it was missing files specific to Windows. > example code, straightforwardness in installation (just > make install); and last time I looked, it was not prohibited to share > the Emacs tree via Samba or a suitable partition. That's why it is in > /usr/share and not /usr/lib. Okay, those are more than enough reasons for including them. >> BTW, regarding tex-jp.el: What happens if tex-jp.elc is included in an >> RPM package or something like this and loaded by a non-MULE XEmacs? >> Will this throw an error? > > I don't think tex-jp is loaded without asking for it, so I don't > really care. Aren't you just a little bit curious? (c; >> In general we should include it completely in an accessible and >> neutral format (e.g. not for a specific paper size). That means >> besides the info format, the manual should be included either as >> plain text or HTML. > > Uh what? What use is plain text? For screen reading, info is more > suited, for printing, PostScript or PDF. Plain text can serve both screen reading and printing. Besides, you don't need a special viewer for it and can print on arbitrary page sizes. It's not the best format for either output device, I know. But maybe it's better than including PostScript or PDF files in various page sizes. HTML might be an acceptable compromise if nobody has a better idea. >> The refcard is somewhat special. How about providing PDF files both >> in A4 and letter format for it? > > Sounds reasonable. > > I am still oscillating over the package layout. IIRC, we don't really > need to know where the texmf tree sits at compile time since kpathsea > can figure this out at run time, right? Yes. We locate files in TeX trees with this function: (defun TeX-macro-global-internal (latex search default) "Return directories containing the site's TeX macro and style files. > So maybe the package > organization would just need > > preview-tetex-styles (independent from AUCTeX!) > > auctex-emacs > > auctex-xemacs (installs like an XEmacs package, thus has no files in > common with auctex-emacs) I guess this means there won't be packages built with --without-texmf-dir but users may choose to install preview.sty independently via preview-tetex-styles? > auctex-tetex (?) installs cron scripts regenerating the auto style > files regularly, and does so whenever auctex or tetex get updated. Why not do this in the respective (X)Emacs packages? -- Ralf _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
