Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since I have a better understanding on this problem at hand:
>
> Debian tetex packages now use pdfetex. 'initex' interface does not
s/Debian tetex packages/teTeX/;
I wouldn't understand what "'initex' interface" means if I hadn't
followed the discussio
Hi,
> > To be more precise, removeal of initex could be a news but
> > its background, i.e. initex is replaced with "tex -ini"
> > is not a news. Anyway I'd like to know what statement
> > in NEWS.Debian do you think is appropriate?
>
> I object to that assertion; it wasn't really announced any
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 04:07:48PM +0900, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> > all. In sarge, virtex was effectively a synonym for plain TeX.
>
> Is this because fmt file for plain TeX is now called as
> tex.fmt (but not plain.fmt which was common in old days),
> and virtex is a symbolic link to tex, and a
From: Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Documenting change to tetex 3.0; deprecating initex and virtex.
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 23:05:41 +0900
> Debian tetex package deprecates initex and virtex commands since
> version 3.0. initex has been superceded by -ini option of tex
> command; inv
From: Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#338608: Documenting change to tetex 3.0; deprecating initex
and virtex.
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 15:24:40 +
> all. In sarge, virtex was effectively a synonym for plain TeX.
Is this because fmt file for plain TeX is now
From: Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Bug#338608: Documenting change to tetex 3.0; deprecating initex and
virtex.
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:45:41 +
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 04:54:30PM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> > Wrong - the Debian package doesn't depreca
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 04:54:30PM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> Wrong - the Debian package doesn't deprecate anything, and not even
> teTeX does. Ten months too late, Debian has a package for teTeX 3.0
> which drops a symlink and thus support for a prognam name which has been
> deprecated for year
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> > Well, it was a news, which could have been included in
>> > 3.0-2 NEWS.Debian.
>>
>> To be more precise, removeal of initex could be a news but
>> its background, i.e. initex is replaced with "tex -ini"
>> is not a news. Anyway I'd like to
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 11:05:41PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Two questions remain:
>
> 1. Is there a documentation stating the differences of the tetex
> implementation from the TeX as documented in TeXBook ?
> That could be useful
Plain TeX (as executed by the command "tex") on a default s
Hi,
> > Well, it was a news, which could have been included in
> > 3.0-2 NEWS.Debian.
>
> To be more precise, removeal of initex could be a news but
> its background, i.e. initex is replaced with "tex -ini"
> is not a news. Anyway I'd like to know what statement
> in NEWS.Debian do you think is
10 matches
Mail list logo
