On 12/22/06, Norbert Preining wrote: > Hi all! > > You know what is coming ... > > First statement: I would prefer to have context in Debian proper, but if > we cannot get anyway with this, putting all the stuff into the nonfree > section might be an option, although it doesn't sound right. > > Ok, I made a list of files in the for zips and took a look. Now it would > be nice to have statements from the respective people about the license: > Please see included stuff: > ... > > cont-fnt contains a huge bunch of vf/afm/tfm/map files. I assume that > they were generated from some fontinst source, but this is missing.
Hans will know that better, but if you're talking about cont-fnt I assume that all these files were created with texfont. afm files contain a header like: Comment Converted at Fri Mar 18 12:57:24 2005 by ttf2afm from font file `arial.ttf' (I guess that texfont calls ttf2afm in that case) map files contain: % This file is generated by the TeXFont Perl script. ConTeXt doesn't use/need fontinst. I assume that all the files were created only once by running texfont script once per each font/encoding, most probably manually (although one could easily reconstruct the ten lines needed to do the conversion). But I don't know whether the fact that one needs a commercial font in order to create and use those supporting files matters or not. > Anyway, there is no accompanying readme or whatsoever besides the one > for lucida. > > ----------------------------------- > > cont-ext seems to be ok besides a few points: > t-lettrine.tex does not have a license statement > t-urwgaramond, type-urwgaramond, type-urwgothic: no license > statement > A different thing is that the sources of many doc are not included: > ./doc/context/third/bnf/t-bnf.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/chromato/chromato-demo.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/chromato/chromato-doc.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/cmscbf/cmscbf-demo.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/cmscbf/cmscbf-doc.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/cmttbf/cmttbf-demo.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/cmttbf/cmttbf-doc.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/construction-plan/construction-plan-demo.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/construction-plan/construction-plan-doc.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/degrade/degrade-demo.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/degrade/degrade-doc.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/french/french-demo.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/french/french-doc.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/typearea/typearea-demo.pdf NOSOURCE > ./doc/context/third/typearea/typearea-doc.pdf NOSOURCE > > So I would have to put them in something like context-nonfree (like > other context documentation) No. All those are all automatically generated from t-whatever.tex. For example, to get french-demo.pdf you need to run texexec --mode=demo t-french.tex and to get french-doc you need to run texexec --module t-french.tex But now my question: when I process the document with "--module" (with texexec.pl and pre-historic version of ConTeXt from april, if that's relevant ;), I get a whole-page MP graphic on the first page. How are the modulename-doc created? Are there any metapost-related settings disabled or has the behavior of texexec changed in the meantime? Mojca _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context