Hilmar Preusse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 03.05.08 Jörg Sommer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> Frank Küster schrieb am Sat 03. May, 11:47 (+0200):
>> > "A. Costa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> > > It looks like 'te
files?
tex-common, in etch, lenny, sid. The problem with --force-confmiss is
that those files are under ucf control, not dpkg control, and ucf
doesn't understand --force-confmiss.
In other days, I'd had been able to give you a solution at once, but
currently I am so out of these uc
gy project, and there's a link
there to
http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/search/authors.html?authorName=651685&Submit=Search
which I'm not entitled to use - but I don't expect much from that.
TIA, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email t
packa
ii tex-common1.10 common infrastructure for building
-- debconf information:
tex-common/check_texmf_wrong:
tex-common/check_texmf_missing:
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe&
Hilmar Preusse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 13.04.08 Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> Daniel Schepler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> > I just noticed that there is still a tetex-base source package in
>> > sid, and that it is
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> I believe the devref instructions are wrong. The proper location for
>>> this information is debian/copyright, whic
Hilmar Preusse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 20.04.08 Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Sa, 19 Apr 2008, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> Hi *;
>
>> >> While you are at changing the place
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The developer's reference describes in
>>
>> 6.7.8 Best practices for orig.tar.gz files
>>
>> how to document properly any changes that need to b
in use, following the advice of the
developer's reference, whereas documenting the multiple binary package
thing in that file is probably new. If we give examples, we should
indeed use the most relevant ones.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
--
To UNSUBSCR
can hope to
not forget this bug.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
s past year has
> been spent migrating book and journal production
> from vms to unix, involving retraining of the
> entire editorial and production staff.
>From what I know from vms, migrating non-geek staff who's used to the
old ways for their whole computer-aware lifetime should
our TeXLive Debian packages - which would be extremely regretful.
I would be glad if you could give us some information what your plans
are,
Frank
[1] as we discussed earlier, the main license text has ambiguous wording
regarding modifications, and there are a couple of files under uncle
nce used to be true, and that is where the habit comes from to
put such a text in the file. Actually it might have been true with
older, non-DFSG-free versions of the LPPL.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
hard.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
ng it out of habit?
- or whether there's any other reason to not just drop it?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
From: Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [tex-live] texlive license
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 19:46:18 +0200
Barbara Beeton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Karl Berry wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> I
/1234: ", preceding the subject text.
>Category: latex
>Synopsis: docstrip inserts wrong comment into generated file
>Confidential: no
>Release: LaTeX2e <2005/12/01>
>Originator: < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
I
| have no interest in discussing this; we have indeed more severe
| licensing problems in texlive; the woeful copyright file is just a
| symptom of that.
`
And now would you please go to debian-legal and not stop me from working
on important license issues in TeXLive?
Regards, Frank
me in 2008.
-- bb
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
es seem to work fine. And if there's a problem with gz'ipped
files (I don't know whether that is true), then I'd argue that's a bug
in firefox.
Thanks for your report!
Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's the first:
And the second:
From: AMS Technical Support <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: re: Unclear License of AMSLaTeX
To: "[iso-8859-1] Frank Kster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], TeXLive <[EMAIL P
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll
> try to gather all the information about this particular package and
> forward the messages individually, as soon as I get a bug number.
Here's the first:
From: Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Unclear
TeX transitional packa
ii tex-common1.10 common infrastructure for building
-- debconf information:
tex-common/check_texmf_wrong:
tex-common/check_texmf_missing:
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
tags 476954 patch
thanks
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> trunk/all/debian/tpm2deb.cfg
> -suggests;texlive-extra-utils;ghostscript
> +recommends;texlive-extra-utils;ghostscript
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
o replace bibtex by bibtex8 generally, as
MikTeX has done it AFAIK?
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Hm, I notice that I never found time to really get used to texlive
packaging... This is a regression compared to teTeX, which did have one
generated copyright file.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
t; Yup, 97 * LPPL.txt, great idea ...
> 97 * 19110 = 1.8Mb more space
> Ok ... if you think that is a good idea.
We could ask whether the lppl can be included in
/usr/share/common-licenses.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
GPL, a source-aware license, for
documentation.
> %% Copyright Boris Veytsman 1997
>
> That's not really recent.
> Have you got any means to get in touch with the copyright holder (that
> is to say, a currently active e-mail address)?
Not without researching; the TeX develop
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mi, 16 Apr 2008, Frank Küster wrote:
>> I'm not sure, this may be the fault of my pbuilder setup. But if it's
>> general, we should do something about it: Simply building tex-common
>> (which build-deps
all magic,
or svn-buildpackage at all, for that matter.
Therefore I'd be grateful if you or someone could build and upload
lmodern; I've just put a final version number into the changelog (but
not yet created a tag in the repository).
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
comply with some (DFSG-free) restrictions included in the
> license text.
That's right. It would be good to contact upstream and ask them to
phrase it correctly. Who will do it...?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
common infrastructure for building
-- debconf information:
tex-common/check_texmf_wrong:
tex-common/check_texmf_missing:
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
package, only like someone
interested in the bug - do you have a suggestion where this should be
explained?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On So, 13 Apr 2008, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Sounds reasonable - except that it seems to me that it should rather
>> be
>> tex-common which creates the directory. teTeX did that, too.
>
> Isn't there something i
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Currently I'm building packages of tex-common-11~1 as in the repository,
> and lmodern with it, and will hopefully report success this evening.
Okay, upgrading lmodern with the tex-common as currently in the repo
does work (and forces
work nicely: I can simply run that script and have all those
> non-free fonts ready to use with LaTeX.
Sounds reasonable - except that it seems to me that it should rather be
tex-common which creates the directory. teTeX did that, too.
Any objections?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
is provided by tex-common. If the problem still exists, please
send us the output of
dpkg -l tex-common
ls -l /usr/share/texmf/web2c
ls -l /etc/texmf/texmf.*
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
klog after
vacation. But anyway, it would be nice if tetex-base could go. However,
Hilmar is still working on checking tetex-doc's bugs.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
work and
won't happen in the forseeable future, due to lack of people working on
the TeX packages.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Hilmar Preusse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 27.01.08 Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> Khaled Hosny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>> >> Then user calls xelatex, mktexfmt tries but sees that there is
>> >> no l
re broad, and I don't think Frank was proposing that
> change, only asking that Policy be consistent with the RC bug policy which
> calls out all cron jobs and init scripts.
Yes, of course. Just because some helper script is a quick hack and
contains a
LOGDIR=/var/log/foo
statement in i
tual problem on your
system? Can you provide a minimal example document?
Moreover, cslatex is a symlink to pdftex by default, so why should the
patch make a difference? I'm not sure, but it might be on purpose what
geometry.sty does.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
ve-base for Lenny, then drop it for
> Lenny+1?
Yes, it doesn't make sense in my view.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
ion was just taken over from tetex-bin/extra and is indeed
misleading. I haven't checked lately, but maybe we can now remove the
tetex-base package again altogether.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
(backwards-compatible) patch, or you ask the upstream author for help
(Heiko Oberdiek IIRC).
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So it seems we actually do need a further conflict in tex-common: If it
> removes all tetex from the search paths, it must also force the
> transition to texlive.
I've done the things I think a necessary in SVN, but won't ha
", but the only correct spelling in german for this word is "E-Mail".
Thank you for reporting this. Would you be so kind and contact the
upstream maintainer and report the error to him? The TeX team is
currently overloaded with work and won't be able to handle issues like
thi
clone 466036 -1
reassign -1 tex-common
retitle -1 tex-common: Must force the transition to texlive upon upgrade to
lenny
block 466036 by -1
thanks
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Do, 21 Feb 2008, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Thanks for your burst of work. I hope that
Move said files to said new distribution
I think upstream should create a collection texlive-obsolete (as
discussed recently on the upstream list), or else it shouldn't done at
all.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
and thus
texinfo) team is currently undermanned and mostly VAC. I won't have time
to look at this the next days anyway.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
pgpE0sarqbcjh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
e found in many other symbols.
Thanks for the report and concise analysis. Since we're currently very
short on manpower in the Debian TeX team, could you do us a favor and
bring the report upstream yourself? The right upstream place is the
LaTeX BTS at http://www.latex-project.org/
Regar
g
is loaded after graphics.sty. If this file is missing on your system,
you have likely been bitten by
http://bugs.debian.org/425803
I think, after some further fixing it should be sufficient to reinstall
texlive-latex-base, and the file will be resurrected.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
quot;texlive-*" | grep -v "^un"
would be helpful. I think it needs to conflict with etch's teTeX, or
depend on lenny's TeXLive.
Thanks for reporting, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
"Richard Hartmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 13, 2008 10:00 PM, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Richard Hartmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> No, there are no broken Depends. There are broken dependencies
-packages that encompass the larger collections, though.
Meta-packages like, say, "texlive-latex-recommended"? Then we're back
to were we started from.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
sounds sensible to me, but I think Norbert (now the main maintainer
of TeXlive) had a reason to do it like this. Let's wait until he returns
(which might take a couple of weeks).
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
RFA bug to RM [RoM] and reassign to ftp.debian.org?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
usb-0.1-4 2:0.1.12-5userspace USB programming library
ii makedev2.3.1-83 creates device files in /dev
ii zlib1g 1:1.2.3-13compression library - runtime
gnupg recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Paul Menzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 03.02.2008, 18:44 +0100 schrieb Frank Küster:
>> Paul Menzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > I finally found [1] and the /usr/share/texmf-tetex (or texlive – I do
>> > not remember and I do
ationship for every bug report we get, for fear of getting
exactly what I said above: One big lump of files, formally divided into
packages, but not actually installable on their own.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
per size in DVI files, and
*nonrandom* info about that in PDF and PS files.
Without that, you don't even get what the layout was meant for, but just
what someone put in the default configuration file. And that might very
well not come out of your printer at all...
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
gt;
> Message:
> Logged In: YES
> user_id=1222560
> Originator: YES
>
> I forgot:
>
> $ xdvi --version
> xdvik version 22.84.10 (Xaw toolkit)
> Libraries: kpathsea version 3.5.6, T1lib version 5.0.1
>
>
> --
>
> You can respond by visiting:
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=377580&aid=1888187&group_id=23164
>
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
reassign 49149 texlive-base-bin
tags 49149 -wontfix
thanks
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
idea that has been agreed upon, and write
a patch?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
forwarded 464351
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1888187&group_id=23164&atid=37758
thanks
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
ge?
I think that would be a good idea, but it should first be done in the
upstream collections. What do others think?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
the new one, since it would be
acceptable to remove pbox-tex before we uploaded a fixed texlive
package.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
ve got anything to
contribute, that is) once you post there.
Remember that they don't know about the earlier parts of this
conversation...
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
s it seems something needs to be done
manually?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
y edited the config file
> by adding the path to dvips35.map to a variable in the beginning.
If you've added /etc/texmf/texmf.d/05TeXmf.cnf and run update-texmf,
that was right. After removing all traces of teTeX, you can now remove
the texmf-tetex part of the path again.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Jonas Smedegaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 08:45:54PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>>maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> kernel-package is even no longer a supported way to build linux-2.6
>>
>>Ah, that's int
>>
>> I made the change below to work around this buggy input. Hope it
>> doesn't cause undue distress.
>>
> Should we check in the diff for Debian until the new upstream version
> is packaged?
Yes, definitely. If you've followed that, I'd appreciate
t. I've used similar wording
in the numerous libpaper bugs. Meanwhile we do have a patch, and the
only reason why nobody has implemented it yet are our time
constraints. Like, having to discuss about...
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
o, Depends is to strict, it should be recommends.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
ine=xetex --var-value=TEXFORMATS
kpsewhich --engine=xetex --show-path='fmt'
grep TEXFORMATS /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf
grep TEXFORMATS /etc/texmf/texmf.d/*
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
g report. Back then,
IIRC, I didn't do anything because I decided I should investigate why we
have it twice (i.e. dig into the perl code), but didn't have time for
that.
Which is still true now...
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mi, 05 Dez 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
>> > - missing: should we take over fmt.d/10texlive-base-bin.cnf? ...
>> >
>> > I guess we should simple add code to the postinst script to remove it?
>>
>> W
t sure, but I thought that these files are kept only if they have
been changed. So their purpose would be to provide the user a way to
migrate their old changes to teTeX's formats to the new TeXLive
configuration files, and they should not be removed in the postinst.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
IL PROTECTED]:~$
That's a serious issue, and may actually be a bug in tex-common.
>/etc/texmf/fmt.d/01tetex.cnf.obsolete not owned
That's something we need to add to the postrm of some package, don't
know which is the right one.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
he
> code, as well as the documentation.
If you do that, you should also *add* information that official kernels
are not supported.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
package...
Manoj, don't you think you should indicate in your package if
development of Debian kernels and kernel-package has so much diverged
that it gets hard for you to keep them working together (it seems you
don't get support on this from the kernel-package maintainers...)
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
gone!
Now that sounds like a bad reason to close a bug. There's probably still
some package which installs kernel headers, isn't it?
> irc this is even a dup.
In which case you should have merged it, not closed.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
pgp1463uLW2lo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
would probably be sufficient.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
"A. Costa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:37:50 +0100
> Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It existed in sarge (oldstable), and was a conffile there. So it
>> could be that on that system, teTeX was installed when it was still
James Westby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-11-25 at 16:58 +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> James Westby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Package: preview-latex-style
>> > Version: 11.83-7
>> > Severity: important
>> &
that
> + # spits out only a warning that no tex system is installed
> + touch doc/texi2dvi.1
> dh_testdir
>
> Isn't it a good solution? And really simple
Yes - I was assuming that the info and man pages were not included in
the tarball.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
erwards removed but not purged. Later on, texlive was installed.
Can those who encountered this problem tell us something about the
history of their systems?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
used in Ubuntu to correct this.
>
> Please consider applying it,
I rather consider to notify the Ubuntu people of their error, but I'm
not sure how to contact a package responsible in Ubuntu.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
included in the diff.gz (or we could go one
turn further and have it in a patch), but if the documentation is not
up-to-date at binary package build time, and no TeX system is available,
the build will fail. Naturally, this relies on the man/info pages being
created from source files, not from
Hi Ondrej,
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ondřej Surý <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> There was a discussion on debian-release. Thought you all track that
>> list.
>
> Definitely not. You should never assume that anyone is following
> deb
lease inform depending packages if you upload a API
>> breaking version to unstable. Thanks.
>
> There was a discussion on debian-release. Thought you all track that
> list.
Definitely not. You should never assume that anyone is following
debian-release.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
exists' and *does not start the previewer*. I have
>> no idea why.
>
> Frank, any idea?
See above... I'll have a look, but not this weekend.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> HI Frank!
>
> On So, 11 Nov 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
>> TEXLIVE_REPOS=svn+ssh://wherever make orig-tar-gz texlive-base?
>
> No, not from the repo directly, but could be done trivially, add a shell
> wrapper which down
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On So, 11 Nov 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
>> On the other hand, introducing alternatives would be overkill. Go ahead.
>
> Can you send me the last version AND (grin grin) a man page ;-)
You'd better search in the texlive list
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On So, 11 Nov 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
>> > You are right, I have a better idea ... we will check the svn TAG!!
>> > Because we are actually (or I am doing it like this) creating the
>> > .orig.tar.gz fro
s flawed. However, it's mostly
problematic if the diverted/ing packages are by different maintainers,
and it's unlikely that anyone will ever maintain luatex separately from
us.
On the other hand, introducing alternatives would be overkill. Go ahead.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
that?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Ralf Stubner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 22:19 +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Ralf Stubner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > * fix texdoc so that it does not matter if a file is compressed or not
>>
>> You could give texdoclu
60 not found
>
> for the various font files.
Please, send us the output of the following commands:
kpsewhich pdftex.map
grep ec-lmbx12 $(kpsewhich pdftex.map)
grep lm-ec.map /var/lib/texmf/web2c/updmap.cfg
grep lm-ec.map /var/lib/texmf/web2c/updmap.log
kpsewhich lm-ec.map
Regards, Fran
...
Yes, it does, many thanks. I'm not sure whether we'll create patches to
fix this, or just inform upstream and wait for a new release.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
401 - 500 of 3194 matches
Mail list logo
