Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Georg Baum]

Peter Flynn wrote:

 All that's required is for the maintainer of the tetex RPMs to use
 up-to-date versions from CTAN, and for the author of the embedded
 install script in the LyX RPM to test for a working kpsewhich instead
 of assuming it's in the location the RH tetex RPMs install it.

It does so, but what you are seeing is the rpm dependency of the LyX rpm on
the TeX rpm. If you install LyX from rpm, it will depend on the TeX rpm
(see below). This is done on purpose, otherwise the rpm would be useless
for ordinary users who use the TeX rpm. If you don't have the TeX rpm,
install LyX from source, or use  the --nodeps switch of rpm. As Jose'
wrote: You are on your won if you want to use the LyX rpm without its
dependencies.

 Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and
 the inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we
 have.

If that really is the case use something else. The important thing to
remember is: rpm and yum do not know of software that is installed from
something else than rpms. So if you don't install TeX from an rpm you will
get missing dependencies in may TeX related rpms. This is no error, neither
of the packages nor of rpm, it is the way how the rpm system was designed
and works.
You can work around this either with the --nodeps switch of rpm, or by
installing these packages from source.


Georg

Re: dia help

[Vaclav Smidl]

Hi myriam,
I have used dia for illustrations and I found that the best way to use them in 
LyX/Latex is the following way: Dia - xfig - pdf/latex.
A shell script for this conversion is attached. It produces two files: .pdf 
and .tex. To include your drawing in the document go for InsertInclude 
File... and enter the name of the .tex file in the dialog that comes up.

In this way, you can use latex commands in Dia. These will be interpreted by 
latex when compiling the main document. The result looks much better.
However, the process is a bit tricky, with many things that can go wrong. Let 
me know if it works for you.

Vasek


On Monday 12 September 2005 01:01, Myriam Abramson wrote:
 Hi!

 Somebody on this list might be familiar with the dia editor tool for
 drawing diagrams on many Linux distributions.

 The text facility seems pretty basic and I urgently need to have
 subscripts and superscripts. Does anybody know how to do that in a
 nice way?

 Thanks for your insights,

-- 
-
Ing. Vaclav Smidl, Ph.D.tel: +420 26605 2420
AS department,  Institute   web: http://www.utia.cas.cz/AS/smidl/
of Information Theory and Automation,   fax: +420 26605 2068
Prague, Czech Republic


dia2pdftex
Description: application/shellscript

Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 Peter == Peter Flynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Peter Paul A. Rubin wrote:
 Sorry, my wording was fuzzy. I don't have a working Linux box handy
 these days, but I assume that LyX runs with the permissions of
 whatever user is logged in. So if you can run latex directly,
 presumably when you run the LyX configure script it has the same
 permissions.

Peter Actually the other way round: RPMs *have* to be installed as
Peter root, and the configure script is built into the RPM, so it
Peter automatically executes *as root* immediately after unpacking
Peter LyX...the user doesn't enter into this at all.

Yes, this is a problem. Actually, I think that we could get rid of
this configure script invocation at install time, but I have to test
it a bit more carefully.

Peter This is madness. All it has to do is a `which kpsewhich` to
Peter find out if a local installation of TeX exists or not. *Then*
Peter it can test the version of LaTeX identified, and see if it
Peter works, and only go hunting for latex binaries as a last resort.

Well, to my defense, I will say that things were a bit different when
I wrote this code long long ago :) Are we now in a situation where
_all_ worthy TeX installations rely on kpathsea?

Peter Absolutely. Some people have truly the weirdest stuff on their
Peter systems. But it's a better plan to search for a working version
Peter first, and only go looking for a better one if the first one
Peter turns out to be a lemon.

I am not sure yet what I want to do. If I have my own latex wrapper
in my PATH, I would not want LyX to try to be clever and use the real
latex instead.

JMarc

Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 Peter == Peter Flynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Peter Even money says that the install script is hard-wired to look
Peter in wherever RH's tetex puts the texhash (and doubtless
Peter kpsewhich) binary, instead of relying on the path to pick up
Peter the right one. No matter, all is now serene.

This is not the case actually. However, I suspect that rpm, when
building the .rpm file, replaces calls to texhash with absolute paths
to where the command was found. So there is not much we can do about
it.

JMarc

Lyx-code formatting

[Dave Mills]

Hi,

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.


Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other suggestion?

I'm using Lyx 1.3.5 on OSX 10.3.9

cheers,
Dave

--

David Mills
Queen Mary, University of London
Department of Chemistry
Mile End Road
E1 4NS, London, UK
Phone: +44 (0)20 78824764
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Lyx-code formatting

[Paul A. Rubin]

Dave Mills wrote:

Hi,

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.


Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other suggestion?

I'm using Lyx 1.3.5 on OSX 10.3.9

cheers,
Dave

The LyX code environment is like the preformatted tag in HTML -- text is 
reproduced verbatim, monospaced.  If you want it verbatim and want it to 
fit, you can block it and use Layout-Character-Size to shrink it. 
Alternatively, if you want it to wrap, you could try switching to 
another environment (standard? quote? definition?) and use 
Layout-Character-Family to change the font family to typewriter.


Paul

Re: dia help

[Paul A. Rubin]

Myriam Abramson wrote:

Hi!

Somebody on this list might be familiar with the dia editor tool for
drawing diagrams on many Linux distributions.

The text facility seems pretty basic and I urgently need to have
subscripts and superscripts. Does anybody know how to do that in a
nice way?

Thanks for your insights,


You might take a look at Ipe.  I've used both Dia and Ipe, and I believe 
Ipe is much better at handling text (assuming the diagram is headed for 
inclusion in a LaTeX document).


Paul

Re: Lyx-code formatting

[Dave Mills]

Paul A. Rubin wrote:

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.




Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other 
suggestion?


The LyX code environment is like the preformatted tag in HTML -- text 
is reproduced verbatim, monospaced.  If you want it verbatim and want 
it to fit, you can block it and use Layout-Character-Size to shrink 
it. Alternatively, if you want it to wrap, you could try switching to 
another environment (standard? quote? definition?) and use 
Layout-Character-Family to change the font family to typewriter.


Paul


Thanks Paul,

I assumed this was the case, but just wanted to make sure I'd not missed 
anything.


cheers,
Dave
--


David Mills
Queen Mary, University of London
Department of Chemistry
Mile End Road
E1 4NS, London, UK
Phone: +44 (0)20 78824764
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: tetex RPMs

[Peter Flynn]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
I read this description from an authoritative source (tug.org) and your 
opinion is quite incoherent and inexperienced when compared to it.


I'm afraid we differ on various points from time to time.


The TeX Collection is self-described as having progressed to the point
that comprehensive began to become incomprehensible. That is a
polite way of saying it had become a mess. 


Correct. That's why they rationalised it while changing from TeX Live
to TeX Collection.


It is no wonder that tetex
would have received a lower priority. You also single out RedHat.


Purely because it's the OS that we have most non-Windows users on here.


Which of the many distros that using rpms or .deb have decided
they have the time to incorporate the endless stream of upgrades in
a system that in its entirety encompasses 6gigs?


None, and I'm certainly not arguing that they should.


Now in 2004, quite a few fundamental changes are made. And
2004 was released as a less perfected product than 2003. I don't
mean that the fundamental changes were a mistake or that a lot
of rough edges can be avoided in such a transition. But certainly
you are not going to find a bunch of Linux distros jumping onto
the bandwagon. They are not going to devote a large portion of
their release to TeX, nor many man-hours to fixing TeX. 


Nor should they. The TC distro works as it stands: no fixing is
needed. All RH (or whoever maintains the RH tetex RPMs on their
behalf) needed to do was take whichever size installation they
wanted to make into an RPM -- the smallest, if need be -- and do it.
Instead, for some unfathomable reason, they appeared to have picked
bits and pieces from different releases and cobbled them together.

I will install the current version that came on the FC4 ISOs again
and check it out, as I have no wish to do them an injustice if this
problem has been recently fixed.

The idea that 
the distros should do this, is undereducated and inexperienced.


I have never suggested that the makers of Linux distros should do
anything of this nature, only that Red Hat's distribution of tetex
has been out of date for years (modulo whatever is available with
RHEL4 and FC4 now -- as I just said).


You speak of having users and dispensing TeX advice for 20 years.


I'm afraid so.


SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.


If you're referring to my ignorance of the .lyx directory, my query
was based only on the implicit assumption in the OP's message that
I should already have one.

///Peter

Re: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Angus Leeming]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
 SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
 qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.

Stephen, cool it please.

-- 
Angus

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Stephen P. Harris]

- Original Message - 
From: Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs



Stephen P. Harris wrote:

SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.


Stephen, cool it please.

--
Angus




I already have. Peter Flynn wrote:

Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and the 
inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we have.


SH: Let me politely describe that as an exaggeration rather than a lie.
rpms were introduced as stable in the Fall of 1995, ten years ago. And
the first Tex Live cd was released the next year in 1996.

Peter Flynn abused this forum by introducing an off-topic rant about
RH tetex rpms which was more than just one post. This provoked a
defensive off-topic post from Jose Matos.

Peter Flynn dismissed Paul A. Rubin's attempt at help with a derisive
This is madness. Because Peter doesn't fully grasp troubleshooting.

Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.

You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a 
right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts. 


Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking kludge{PF}. 


Sincerely,
Stephen

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Angus Leeming]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
 Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
 of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
 was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.

My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your mails as
they arrived.

 You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
 be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
 bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a
 right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
 justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts.
 
 Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
 perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
 a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking kludge{PF}.

I don't see what your opinions about my moral character have to do with
just about anything. This mailing list has never needed a moderator. I'd
rather hope that that would continue.

Truly, I feel somewhat surprised to be the subject of your vitriol. If
England hadn't just regained the Ashes in a heroic and titanic struggle
against the Aussies, your post might even make me feel a little upset.

 Sincerely,
 Stephen

-- 
Angus

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Stephen P. Harris]

- Original Message - 
From: Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs



Stephen P. Harris wrote:

Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.


My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your mails as
they arrived.



You are not when you act as a contributor to the mailing list. However,
Angus wrote:  Stephen, cool it please.

That statement is easily seen as one of moral censure. Moderators who 
make such statements are obligated to read the entire thread. 
Non-moderators can also express their opinions and they are free to do so, 
no matter how ignorant they are of the circumstances. Certainly reminds me 
of Peter Flynn. 


You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a
right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts.

Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking kludge{PF}.


I don't see what your opinions about my moral character have to do with
just about anything. This mailing list has never needed a moderator. I'd
rather hope that that would continue.



Stephen, cool it please. 
SH: That means you think I have said something inappropriate. 
I doubt if you are delusional enough to suppose that your opinions

are facts. So your opinion is a value judgment relating to _your_
moral or ethical standards. A moderator is a person who has the
authority to impose their ethical standards/opinions. You do not
hold my respect as an ethical arbiter. I would have to respect your
opinion, have some regard for your moral/ethical stature in order
to think your opinion of what is inappropriate (cool it) is something
which I should pay heed to. You would need to be mature IMO, not
someone who wears there feelings on their cuff. 


Perhaps I have been too subtle. Your moral character which is composed
of your values and standards served as the basis for your censorial remark.
Censorial remarks are rightfully made by moderators. Non-moderators 
can also make such remarks. Your statement is no different than mine in

that it expressed displeasure... again IMO, the person who has the most
information is the most qualified to make a determination about what is
appropriate. I can't help it if you don't agree. Nor can I help it if you
think my statements are inflammatory, rather than accurate, and that 
Flynn's statements are innocuous. You didn't respond to the issue, IMO.



Truly, I feel somewhat surprised to be the subject of your vitriol. If
England hadn't just regained the Ashes in a heroic and titanic struggle
against the Aussies, your post might even make me feel a little upset.



Does that sport have the situation where the referee blows the whistle
on the second foul? I see that as 'enabling', defending the real culprit, 
and I'm strongly opposed to it because it makes my world a worse place.

I think the solution to Peter's problem is found in the TeX Live 2000
userguide, not attributable to the evil RH tetex.rpm developers who Peter 
suggests are perhaps deliberately sabotaging the Tex Live releases.


I've thought this over before posting. I think most likely you are not
aware of why I don't like Peter Flynn's type of person, or even know
that he is that type of person. I did think previously, that you were
writing from a more informed point of view, which was based upon
circumstantial evidence, although,  since you obvioulsy don't support 
certain Australian Apartheid policies, I am not sure of my supposition

regarding the depth of your cunning.

Tally Ho,
Stephen

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 Stephen == Stephen P Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your
 mails as they arrived.
 

Stephen You are not when you act as a contributor to the mailing
Stephen list. However, Angus wrote:  Stephen, cool it please.

Stephen That statement is easily seen as one of moral censure.
Stephen Moderators who make such statements are obligated to read the
Stephen entire thread. Non-moderators can also express their opinions
Stephen and they are free to do so, no matter how ignorant they are
Stephen of the circumstances. Certainly reminds me of Peter Flynn.

I get it: you generate your messages with the automatic insult letter
generator! Could you give me the URL please? The one I had does not
work anymore...

JMarc

PS: Cool it, please.

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Georg Baum]

Peter Flynn wrote:

 All that's required is for the maintainer of the tetex RPMs to use
 up-to-date versions from CTAN, and for the author of the embedded
 install script in the LyX RPM to test for a working kpsewhich instead
 of assuming it's in the location the RH tetex RPMs install it.

It does so, but what you are seeing is the rpm dependency of the LyX rpm on
the TeX rpm. If you install LyX from rpm, it will depend on the TeX rpm
(see below). This is done on purpose, otherwise the rpm would be useless
for ordinary users who use the TeX rpm. If you don't have the TeX rpm,
install LyX from source, or use  the --nodeps switch of rpm. As Jose'
wrote: You are on your won if you want to use the LyX rpm without its
dependencies.

 Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and
 the inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we
 have.

If that really is the case use something else. The important thing to
remember is: rpm and yum do not know of software that is installed from
something else than rpms. So if you don't install TeX from an rpm you will
get missing dependencies in may TeX related rpms. This is no error, neither
of the packages nor of rpm, it is the way how the rpm system was designed
and works.
You can work around this either with the --nodeps switch of rpm, or by
installing these packages from source.


Georg

Re: dia help

[Vaclav Smidl]

Hi myriam,
I have used dia for illustrations and I found that the best way to use them in 
LyX/Latex is the following way: Dia - xfig - pdf/latex.
A shell script for this conversion is attached. It produces two files: .pdf 
and .tex. To include your drawing in the document go for InsertInclude 
File... and enter the name of the .tex file in the dialog that comes up.

In this way, you can use latex commands in Dia. These will be interpreted by 
latex when compiling the main document. The result looks much better.
However, the process is a bit tricky, with many things that can go wrong. Let 
me know if it works for you.

Vasek


On Monday 12 September 2005 01:01, Myriam Abramson wrote:
 Hi!

 Somebody on this list might be familiar with the dia editor tool for
 drawing diagrams on many Linux distributions.

 The text facility seems pretty basic and I urgently need to have
 subscripts and superscripts. Does anybody know how to do that in a
 nice way?

 Thanks for your insights,

-- 
-
Ing. Vaclav Smidl, Ph.D.tel: +420 26605 2420
AS department,  Institute   web: http://www.utia.cas.cz/AS/smidl/
of Information Theory and Automation,   fax: +420 26605 2068
Prague, Czech Republic


dia2pdftex
Description: application/shellscript

Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 Peter == Peter Flynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Peter Paul A. Rubin wrote:
 Sorry, my wording was fuzzy. I don't have a working Linux box handy
 these days, but I assume that LyX runs with the permissions of
 whatever user is logged in. So if you can run latex directly,
 presumably when you run the LyX configure script it has the same
 permissions.

Peter Actually the other way round: RPMs *have* to be installed as
Peter root, and the configure script is built into the RPM, so it
Peter automatically executes *as root* immediately after unpacking
Peter LyX...the user doesn't enter into this at all.

Yes, this is a problem. Actually, I think that we could get rid of
this configure script invocation at install time, but I have to test
it a bit more carefully.

Peter This is madness. All it has to do is a `which kpsewhich` to
Peter find out if a local installation of TeX exists or not. *Then*
Peter it can test the version of LaTeX identified, and see if it
Peter works, and only go hunting for latex binaries as a last resort.

Well, to my defense, I will say that things were a bit different when
I wrote this code long long ago :) Are we now in a situation where
_all_ worthy TeX installations rely on kpathsea?

Peter Absolutely. Some people have truly the weirdest stuff on their
Peter systems. But it's a better plan to search for a working version
Peter first, and only go looking for a better one if the first one
Peter turns out to be a lemon.

I am not sure yet what I want to do. If I have my own latex wrapper
in my PATH, I would not want LyX to try to be clever and use the real
latex instead.

JMarc

Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 Peter == Peter Flynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Peter Even money says that the install script is hard-wired to look
Peter in wherever RH's tetex puts the texhash (and doubtless
Peter kpsewhich) binary, instead of relying on the path to pick up
Peter the right one. No matter, all is now serene.

This is not the case actually. However, I suspect that rpm, when
building the .rpm file, replaces calls to texhash with absolute paths
to where the command was found. So there is not much we can do about
it.

JMarc

Lyx-code formatting

[Dave Mills]

Hi,

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.


Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other suggestion?

I'm using Lyx 1.3.5 on OSX 10.3.9

cheers,
Dave

--

David Mills
Queen Mary, University of London
Department of Chemistry
Mile End Road
E1 4NS, London, UK
Phone: +44 (0)20 78824764
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Lyx-code formatting

[Paul A. Rubin]

Dave Mills wrote:

Hi,

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.


Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other suggestion?

I'm using Lyx 1.3.5 on OSX 10.3.9

cheers,
Dave

The LyX code environment is like the preformatted tag in HTML -- text is 
reproduced verbatim, monospaced.  If you want it verbatim and want it to 
fit, you can block it and use Layout-Character-Size to shrink it. 
Alternatively, if you want it to wrap, you could try switching to 
another environment (standard? quote? definition?) and use 
Layout-Character-Family to change the font family to typewriter.


Paul

Re: dia help

[Paul A. Rubin]

Myriam Abramson wrote:

Hi!

Somebody on this list might be familiar with the dia editor tool for
drawing diagrams on many Linux distributions.

The text facility seems pretty basic and I urgently need to have
subscripts and superscripts. Does anybody know how to do that in a
nice way?

Thanks for your insights,


You might take a look at Ipe.  I've used both Dia and Ipe, and I believe 
Ipe is much better at handling text (assuming the diagram is headed for 
inclusion in a LaTeX document).


Paul

Re: Lyx-code formatting

[Dave Mills]

Paul A. Rubin wrote:

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.




Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other 
suggestion?


The LyX code environment is like the preformatted tag in HTML -- text 
is reproduced verbatim, monospaced.  If you want it verbatim and want 
it to fit, you can block it and use Layout-Character-Size to shrink 
it. Alternatively, if you want it to wrap, you could try switching to 
another environment (standard? quote? definition?) and use 
Layout-Character-Family to change the font family to typewriter.


Paul


Thanks Paul,

I assumed this was the case, but just wanted to make sure I'd not missed 
anything.


cheers,
Dave
--


David Mills
Queen Mary, University of London
Department of Chemistry
Mile End Road
E1 4NS, London, UK
Phone: +44 (0)20 78824764
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: tetex RPMs

[Peter Flynn]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
I read this description from an authoritative source (tug.org) and your 
opinion is quite incoherent and inexperienced when compared to it.


I'm afraid we differ on various points from time to time.


The TeX Collection is self-described as having progressed to the point
that comprehensive began to become incomprehensible. That is a
polite way of saying it had become a mess. 


Correct. That's why they rationalised it while changing from TeX Live
to TeX Collection.


It is no wonder that tetex
would have received a lower priority. You also single out RedHat.


Purely because it's the OS that we have most non-Windows users on here.


Which of the many distros that using rpms or .deb have decided
they have the time to incorporate the endless stream of upgrades in
a system that in its entirety encompasses 6gigs?


None, and I'm certainly not arguing that they should.


Now in 2004, quite a few fundamental changes are made. And
2004 was released as a less perfected product than 2003. I don't
mean that the fundamental changes were a mistake or that a lot
of rough edges can be avoided in such a transition. But certainly
you are not going to find a bunch of Linux distros jumping onto
the bandwagon. They are not going to devote a large portion of
their release to TeX, nor many man-hours to fixing TeX. 


Nor should they. The TC distro works as it stands: no fixing is
needed. All RH (or whoever maintains the RH tetex RPMs on their
behalf) needed to do was take whichever size installation they
wanted to make into an RPM -- the smallest, if need be -- and do it.
Instead, for some unfathomable reason, they appeared to have picked
bits and pieces from different releases and cobbled them together.

I will install the current version that came on the FC4 ISOs again
and check it out, as I have no wish to do them an injustice if this
problem has been recently fixed.

The idea that 
the distros should do this, is undereducated and inexperienced.


I have never suggested that the makers of Linux distros should do
anything of this nature, only that Red Hat's distribution of tetex
has been out of date for years (modulo whatever is available with
RHEL4 and FC4 now -- as I just said).


You speak of having users and dispensing TeX advice for 20 years.


I'm afraid so.


SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.


If you're referring to my ignorance of the .lyx directory, my query
was based only on the implicit assumption in the OP's message that
I should already have one.

///Peter

Re: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Angus Leeming]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
 SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
 qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.

Stephen, cool it please.

-- 
Angus

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Stephen P. Harris]

- Original Message - 
From: Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs



Stephen P. Harris wrote:

SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.


Stephen, cool it please.

--
Angus




I already have. Peter Flynn wrote:

Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and the 
inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we have.


SH: Let me politely describe that as an exaggeration rather than a lie.
rpms were introduced as stable in the Fall of 1995, ten years ago. And
the first Tex Live cd was released the next year in 1996.

Peter Flynn abused this forum by introducing an off-topic rant about
RH tetex rpms which was more than just one post. This provoked a
defensive off-topic post from Jose Matos.

Peter Flynn dismissed Paul A. Rubin's attempt at help with a derisive
This is madness. Because Peter doesn't fully grasp troubleshooting.

Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.

You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a 
right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts. 


Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking kludge{PF}. 


Sincerely,
Stephen

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Angus Leeming]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
 Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
 of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
 was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.

My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your mails as
they arrived.

 You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
 be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
 bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a
 right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
 justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts.
 
 Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
 perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
 a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking kludge{PF}.

I don't see what your opinions about my moral character have to do with
just about anything. This mailing list has never needed a moderator. I'd
rather hope that that would continue.

Truly, I feel somewhat surprised to be the subject of your vitriol. If
England hadn't just regained the Ashes in a heroic and titanic struggle
against the Aussies, your post might even make me feel a little upset.

 Sincerely,
 Stephen

-- 
Angus

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Stephen P. Harris]

- Original Message - 
From: Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs



Stephen P. Harris wrote:

Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.


My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your mails as
they arrived.



You are not when you act as a contributor to the mailing list. However,
Angus wrote:  Stephen, cool it please.

That statement is easily seen as one of moral censure. Moderators who 
make such statements are obligated to read the entire thread. 
Non-moderators can also express their opinions and they are free to do so, 
no matter how ignorant they are of the circumstances. Certainly reminds me 
of Peter Flynn. 


You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a
right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts.

Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking kludge{PF}.


I don't see what your opinions about my moral character have to do with
just about anything. This mailing list has never needed a moderator. I'd
rather hope that that would continue.



Stephen, cool it please. 
SH: That means you think I have said something inappropriate. 
I doubt if you are delusional enough to suppose that your opinions

are facts. So your opinion is a value judgment relating to _your_
moral or ethical standards. A moderator is a person who has the
authority to impose their ethical standards/opinions. You do not
hold my respect as an ethical arbiter. I would have to respect your
opinion, have some regard for your moral/ethical stature in order
to think your opinion of what is inappropriate (cool it) is something
which I should pay heed to. You would need to be mature IMO, not
someone who wears there feelings on their cuff. 


Perhaps I have been too subtle. Your moral character which is composed
of your values and standards served as the basis for your censorial remark.
Censorial remarks are rightfully made by moderators. Non-moderators 
can also make such remarks. Your statement is no different than mine in

that it expressed displeasure... again IMO, the person who has the most
information is the most qualified to make a determination about what is
appropriate. I can't help it if you don't agree. Nor can I help it if you
think my statements are inflammatory, rather than accurate, and that 
Flynn's statements are innocuous. You didn't respond to the issue, IMO.



Truly, I feel somewhat surprised to be the subject of your vitriol. If
England hadn't just regained the Ashes in a heroic and titanic struggle
against the Aussies, your post might even make me feel a little upset.



Does that sport have the situation where the referee blows the whistle
on the second foul? I see that as 'enabling', defending the real culprit, 
and I'm strongly opposed to it because it makes my world a worse place.

I think the solution to Peter's problem is found in the TeX Live 2000
userguide, not attributable to the evil RH tetex.rpm developers who Peter 
suggests are perhaps deliberately sabotaging the Tex Live releases.


I've thought this over before posting. I think most likely you are not
aware of why I don't like Peter Flynn's type of person, or even know
that he is that type of person. I did think previously, that you were
writing from a more informed point of view, which was based upon
circumstantial evidence, although,  since you obvioulsy don't support 
certain Australian Apartheid policies, I am not sure of my supposition

regarding the depth of your cunning.

Tally Ho,
Stephen

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

 Stephen == Stephen P Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your
 mails as they arrived.
 

Stephen You are not when you act as a contributor to the mailing
Stephen list. However, Angus wrote:  Stephen, cool it please.

Stephen That statement is easily seen as one of moral censure.
Stephen Moderators who make such statements are obligated to read the
Stephen entire thread. Non-moderators can also express their opinions
Stephen and they are free to do so, no matter how ignorant they are
Stephen of the circumstances. Certainly reminds me of Peter Flynn.

I get it: you generate your messages with the automatic insult letter
generator! Could you give me the URL please? The one I had does not
work anymore...

JMarc

PS: Cool it, please.

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Georg Baum]

Peter Flynn wrote:

> All that's required is for the maintainer of the tetex RPMs to use
> up-to-date versions from CTAN, and for the author of the embedded
> install script in the LyX RPM to test for a working kpsewhich instead
> of assuming it's in the location the RH tetex RPMs install it.

It does so, but what you are seeing is the rpm dependency of the LyX rpm on
the TeX rpm. If you install LyX from rpm, it will depend on the TeX rpm
(see below). This is done on purpose, otherwise the rpm would be useless
for ordinary users who use the TeX rpm. If you don't have the TeX rpm,
install LyX from source, or use  the --nodeps switch of rpm. As Jose'
wrote: You are on your won if you want to use the LyX rpm without its
dependencies.

> Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and
> the inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we
> have.

If that really is the case use something else. The important thing to
remember is: rpm and yum do not know of software that is installed from
something else than rpms. So if you don't install TeX from an rpm you will
get missing dependencies in may TeX related rpms. This is no error, neither
of the packages nor of rpm, it is the way how the rpm system was designed
and works.
You can work around this either with the --nodeps switch of rpm, or by
installing these packages from source.


Georg

Re: dia help

[Vaclav Smidl]

Hi myriam,
I have used dia for illustrations and I found that the best way to use them in 
LyX/Latex is the following way: Dia -> xfig -> pdf/latex.
A shell script for this conversion is attached. It produces two files: .pdf 
and .tex. To include your drawing in the document go for Insert>Include 
File... and enter the name of the .tex file in the dialog that comes up.

In this way, you can use latex commands in Dia. These will be interpreted by 
latex when compiling the main document. The result looks much better.
However, the process is a bit tricky, with many things that can go wrong. Let 
me know if it works for you.

Vasek


On Monday 12 September 2005 01:01, Myriam Abramson wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Somebody on this list might be familiar with the dia editor tool for
> drawing diagrams on many Linux distributions.
>
> The text facility seems pretty basic and I urgently need to have
> subscripts and superscripts. Does anybody know how to do that in a
> nice way?
>
> Thanks for your insights,

-- 
-
Ing. Vaclav Smidl, Ph.D.tel: +420 26605 2420
AS department,  Institute   web: http://www.utia.cas.cz/AS/smidl/
of Information Theory and Automation,   fax: +420 26605 2068
Prague, Czech Republic


dia2pdftex
Description: application/shellscript

Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

> "Peter" == Peter Flynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Peter> Paul A. Rubin wrote:
>> Sorry, my wording was fuzzy. I don't have a working Linux box handy
>> these days, but I assume that LyX runs with the permissions of
>> whatever user is logged in. So if you can run latex directly,
>> presumably when you run the LyX configure script it has the same
>> permissions.

Peter> Actually the other way round: RPMs *have* to be installed as
Peter> root, and the configure script is built into the RPM, so it
Peter> automatically executes *as root* immediately after unpacking
Peter> LyX...the user doesn't enter into this at all.

Yes, this is a problem. Actually, I think that we could get rid of
this configure script invocation at install time, but I have to test
it a bit more carefully.

Peter> This is madness. All it has to do is a `which kpsewhich` to
Peter> find out if a local installation of TeX exists or not. *Then*
Peter> it can test the version of LaTeX identified, and see if it
Peter> works, and only go hunting for latex binaries as a last resort.

Well, to my defense, I will say that things were a bit different when
I wrote this code long long ago :) Are we now in a situation where
_all_ worthy TeX installations rely on kpathsea?

Peter> Absolutely. Some people have truly the weirdest stuff on their
Peter> systems. But it's a better plan to search for a working version
Peter> first, and only go looking for a better one if the first one
Peter> turns out to be a lemon.

I am not sure yet what I want to do. If I have my own "latex" wrapper
in my PATH, I would not want LyX to try to be clever and use the real
latex instead.

JMarc

Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

> "Peter" == Peter Flynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Peter> Even money says that the install script is hard-wired to look
Peter> in wherever RH's tetex puts the texhash (and doubtless
Peter> kpsewhich) binary, instead of relying on the path to pick up
Peter> the right one. No matter, all is now serene.

This is not the case actually. However, I suspect that rpm, when
building the .rpm file, replaces calls to texhash with absolute paths
to where the command was found. So there is not much we can do about
it.

JMarc

Lyx-code formatting

[Dave Mills]

Hi,

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.


Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other suggestion?

I'm using Lyx 1.3.5 on OSX 10.3.9

cheers,
Dave

--

David Mills
Queen Mary, University of London
Department of Chemistry
Mile End Road
E1 4NS, London, UK
Phone: +44 (0)20 78824764
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Lyx-code formatting

[Paul A. Rubin]

Dave Mills wrote:

Hi,

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.


Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other suggestion?

I'm using Lyx 1.3.5 on OSX 10.3.9

cheers,
Dave

The LyX code environment is like the preformatted tag in HTML -- text is 
reproduced verbatim, monospaced.  If you want it verbatim and want it to 
fit, you can block it and use Layout->Character->Size to shrink it. 
Alternatively, if you want it to wrap, you could try switching to 
another environment (standard? quote? definition?) and use 
Layout->Character->Family to change the font family to typewriter.


Paul

Re: dia help

[Paul A. Rubin]

Myriam Abramson wrote:

Hi!

Somebody on this list might be familiar with the dia editor tool for
drawing diagrams on many Linux distributions.

The text facility seems pretty basic and I urgently need to have
subscripts and superscripts. Does anybody know how to do that in a
nice way?

Thanks for your insights,


You might take a look at Ipe.  I've used both Dia and Ipe, and I believe 
Ipe is much better at handling text (assuming the diagram is headed for 
inclusion in a LaTeX document).


Paul

Re: Lyx-code formatting

[Dave Mills]

Paul A. Rubin wrote:

I've got a document with some numbered chemical reaction equations 
formated as lyx-code.  The problem is, when I generate a PDF the 
equations run over the edge of the page, they don't wrap around to the 
next line.




Is it possible to make them wrap? Some ERT needed?  Any other 
suggestion?


The LyX code environment is like the preformatted tag in HTML -- text 
is reproduced verbatim, monospaced.  If you want it verbatim and want 
it to fit, you can block it and use Layout->Character->Size to shrink 
it. Alternatively, if you want it to wrap, you could try switching to 
another environment (standard? quote? definition?) and use 
Layout->Character->Family to change the font family to typewriter.


Paul


Thanks Paul,

I assumed this was the case, but just wanted to make sure I'd not missed 
anything.


cheers,
Dave
--


David Mills
Queen Mary, University of London
Department of Chemistry
Mile End Road
E1 4NS, London, UK
Phone: +44 (0)20 78824764
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: tetex RPMs

[Peter Flynn]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
I read this description from an authoritative source (tug.org) and your 
opinion is quite incoherent and inexperienced when compared to it.


I'm afraid we differ on various points from time to time.


The TeX Collection is self-described as having progressed to the point
"that comprehensive began to become incomprehensible". That is a
polite way of saying it had become a mess. 


Correct. That's why they rationalised it while changing from TeX Live
to TeX Collection.


It is no wonder that tetex
would have received a lower priority. You also single out RedHat.


Purely because it's the OS that we have most non-Windows users on here.


Which of the many distros that using rpms or .deb have decided
they have the time to incorporate the endless stream of upgrades in
a system that in its entirety encompasses 6gigs?


None, and I'm certainly not arguing that they should.


Now in 2004, quite a few fundamental changes are made. And
2004 was released as a less perfected product than 2003. I don't
mean that the fundamental changes were a mistake or that a lot
of rough edges can be avoided in such a transition. But certainly
you are not going to find a bunch of Linux distros jumping onto
the bandwagon. They are not going to devote a large portion of
their release to TeX, nor many man-hours to fixing TeX. 


Nor should they. The TC distro works as it stands: no "fixing" is
needed. All RH (or whoever maintains the RH tetex RPMs on their
behalf) needed to do was take whichever size installation they
wanted to make into an RPM -- the smallest, if need be -- and do it.
Instead, for some unfathomable reason, they appeared to have picked
bits and pieces from different releases and cobbled them together.

I will install the current version that came on the FC4 ISOs again
and check it out, as I have no wish to do them an injustice if this
problem has been recently fixed.

The idea that 
the distros should do this, is undereducated and inexperienced.


I have never suggested that the makers of Linux distros should do
anything of this nature, only that Red Hat's distribution of tetex
has been out of date for years (modulo whatever is available with
RHEL4 and FC4 now -- as I just said).


You speak of having users and dispensing TeX advice for 20 years.


I'm afraid so.


SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.


If you're referring to my ignorance of the .lyx directory, my query
was based only on the implicit assumption in the OP's message that
I should already have one.

///Peter

Re: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Angus Leeming]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
> SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
> qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.

Stephen, cool it please.

-- 
Angus

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Stephen P. Harris]

- Original Message - 
From: "Angus Leeming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs



Stephen P. Harris wrote:

SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique
qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements.


Stephen, cool it please.

--
Angus




I already have. Peter Flynn wrote:

"Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and the 
inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we have."


SH: Let me politely describe that as an exaggeration rather than a lie.
rpms were introduced as stable in the Fall of 1995, ten years ago. And
the first Tex Live cd was released the next year in 1996.

Peter Flynn abused this forum by introducing an off-topic rant about
RH tetex rpms which was more than just one post. This provoked a
defensive off-topic post from Jose Matos.

Peter Flynn dismissed Paul A. Rubin's attempt at help with a derisive
"This is madness." Because Peter doesn't fully grasp troubleshooting.

Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.

You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a 
right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts. 


Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking "kludge"{PF}. 


Sincerely,
Stephen

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Angus Leeming]

Stephen P. Harris wrote:
> Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
> of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
> was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.

My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your mails as
they arrived.

> You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
> be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
> bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a
> right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
> justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts.
> 
> Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
> perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
> a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking "kludge"{PF}.

I don't see what your opinions about my moral character have to do with
just about anything. This mailing list has never needed a moderator. I'd
rather hope that that would continue.

Truly, I feel somewhat surprised to be the subject of your vitriol. If
England hadn't just regained the Ashes in a heroic and titanic struggle
against the Aussies, your post might even make me feel a little upset.

> Sincerely,
> Stephen

-- 
Angus

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Stephen P. Harris]

- Original Message - 
From: "Angus Leeming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs



Stephen P. Harris wrote:

Peter Flynn is an arrogant, ignorant blowhard. I think my expression
of dissatisfaction was rather moderate. I think your moral intervention
was a day late and a dollar short and not directed at the instigator.


My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your mails as
they arrived.



You are not when you act as a contributor to the mailing list. However,
Angus wrote: > Stephen, cool it please.

That statement is easily seen as one of moral censure. Moderators who 
make such statements are obligated to read the entire thread. 
Non-moderators can also express their opinions and they are free to do so, 
no matter how ignorant they are of the circumstances. Certainly reminds me 
of Peter Flynn. 


You are a fairly adept developer. Your ethical values leave a lot to
be desired, IMO, as I mentioned before when I asked you not to
bother me before. You are far from a moral authority. If you have a
right to post your annoyance to what I wrote, I feel much more
justified to complain about Peter Flynn's provocative posts.

Maybe you don't care about my ethical values. That puts you in a
perfect position to understand why I don't care about yours. As
a wannabe moderator, I view you as a flunking "kludge"{PF}.


I don't see what your opinions about my moral character have to do with
just about anything. This mailing list has never needed a moderator. I'd
rather hope that that would continue.



Stephen, cool it please. 
SH: That means you think I have said something inappropriate. 
I doubt if you are delusional enough to suppose that your opinions

are facts. So your opinion is a value judgment relating to _your_
moral or ethical standards. A moderator is a person who has the
authority to impose their ethical standards/opinions. You do not
hold my respect as an ethical arbiter. I would have to respect your
opinion, have some regard for your moral/ethical stature in order
to think your opinion of what is inappropriate ("cool it) is something
which I should pay heed to. You would need to be mature IMO, not
someone who wears there feelings on their cuff. 


Perhaps I have been too subtle. Your moral character which is composed
of your values and standards served as the basis for your censorial remark.
Censorial remarks are rightfully made by moderators. Non-moderators 
can also make such remarks. Your statement is no different than mine in

that it expressed displeasure... again IMO, the person who has the most
information is the most qualified to make a determination about what is
appropriate. I can't help it if you don't agree. Nor can I help it if you
think my statements are inflammatory, rather than accurate, and that 
Flynn's statements are innocuous. You didn't respond to the issue, IMO.



Truly, I feel somewhat surprised to be the subject of your vitriol. If
England hadn't just regained the Ashes in a heroic and titanic struggle
against the Aussies, your post might even make me feel a little upset.



Does that sport have the situation where the referee blows the whistle
on the second foul? I see that as 'enabling', defending the real culprit, 
and I'm strongly opposed to it because it makes my world a worse place.

I think the solution to Peter's problem is found in the TeX Live 2000
userguide, not attributable to the evil RH tetex.rpm developers who Peter 
suggests are perhaps deliberately sabotaging the Tex Live releases.


I've thought this over before posting. I think most likely you are not
aware of why I don't like Peter Flynn's type of person, or even know
that he is that type of person. I did think previously, that you were
writing from a more informed point of view, which was based upon
circumstantial evidence, although,  since you obvioulsy don't support 
certain Australian Apartheid policies, I am not sure of my supposition

regarding the depth of your cunning.

Tally Ho,
Stephen

Re: OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

> "Stephen" == Stephen P Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>> My apologies. I hadn't realised I was expected to read all your
>> mails as they arrived.
>> 

Stephen> You are not when you act as a contributor to the mailing
Stephen> list. However, Angus wrote: > Stephen, cool it please.

Stephen> That statement is easily seen as one of moral censure.
Stephen> Moderators who make such statements are obligated to read the
Stephen> entire thread. Non-moderators can also express their opinions
Stephen> and they are free to do so, no matter how ignorant they are
Stephen> of the circumstances. Certainly reminds me of Peter Flynn.

I get it: you generate your messages with the automatic insult letter
generator! Could you give me the URL please? The one I had does not
work anymore...

JMarc

PS: Cool it, please.