On 12/16/06, David R. Morrison wrote: > > If system-tetex and system-ghostscript are removed, it will simply mean that > fink users who wish to use one of the other TeX and ghostscript > installations for daily use will be forced to download and install a second > copy of TeX (namely fink's copy).
Does that mean that I'll have to remove fink from path every time when I'll want to use TeX provided by the system? I wouldn't have any objections as long as someone could guarantee me that the TeX provided by fink would be based at least on TeXLive2006, would include XeTeX and the possibility to use the latest ConTeXt. I don't want fink's executables to have precedence over i-Installer's ones since fink's version will probably remain behind time. Most LaTeX users don't ever notice that, but ConTeXt users probably do. (I had to install "system-tetex" just because there was some strange dependency stating that gnuplot needed kpathsea headers, but outside of fink I managed to compile gnuplot without any problems.) Mojca ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
