Hi Dave,
Thanks for your quick update. One more package depends on carlisle:
pdfscreen. This package can be removed without further dependencies. Is
this package included in the new tetex, too?
The package tetex-texmf produces one warning concerning a not empty
directory while replacing the
> "Randal" == Randal L Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Randal> You didn't mention that "bundle-tetex" is now severely broken. It is.
Randal> It wants to install things that aren't provided by tetex-base, except
Randal> that they are, and so it tries to install the old version of
Randal>
> "David" == David R Morrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
David> If you are upgrading from a previous teTeX installation on
David> Fink, you will most likely need to reinstall one of the
David> packages in the middle of the upgrade. There is a warning
David> message which tells you what to do
Hi Dave,
On Monday, February 3, 2003, at 05:23 AM, David R. Morrison wrote:
Dear Fink folks,
Yesterday saw a major new release of teTeX, and there are new Fink
packages
for this release in the unstable tree. Users should be aware that
upgrading
to these new packages will require the downl
Dear Fink folks,
Yesterday saw a major new release of teTeX, and there are new Fink packages
for this release in the unstable tree. Users should be aware that upgrading
to these new packages will require the download of 80 MB of source files,
and substantial compiling time.
If you are upgrading
Sorry, Bill. You'll need to install things in this order, by version number:
tetex-beta-shlibs, tetex-beta-base, tetex-beta-x11tools, tetex-beta.
Or, remove both the .info file and the .deb files (which might be someplace
like /sw/fink/dists/local/main/binary-darwin-powerpc, depending on where
yo
How do I convince fink to reinstall the older version of tetex-beta? It
insists on wanting to install version 2, even though I've removed
everything associated with it (then, of course, it complains that it
can't find the package description). I've tried giving it the explicit
version number, a
William McCallum wrote:
Dave,
the second revision failed to install with the following error message
(I put the new files in my local tree and did fink update tetex-beta).
Hah! This time it installed OK for me. Funny...
--
Martin
---
This
Dave,
the second revision failed to install with the following error message
(I put the new files in my local tree and did fink update tetex-beta).
...
Transcript written on mptopdf.log.
fmtutil: /sw/share/texmf/web2c/lambda.oft installed.
fmtutil: /sw/share/texmf/web2c/omega.oft installed.
fmt
I've put a second revision of my experimental teTeX packages in the
experimental/dmrrsn CVS module.
I appreciate the feedback!
By the way, folks helping me test will probably need to remove the "beta"
packages by hand, when the final version comes out.
-- Dave
---
I see what caused Martin's problems, and I'm working on a revised version.
Thanks for the suggestion about ~/Library/texmf Bill; I will implement that.
-- Dave
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + Lin
My install went fine (syst-tex was where it was supposed to be) and
everything seems to be working. I have tested it out on a document that
uses T1 fonts and it renders them correctly, also correctly calls on
ghostscript to render included postscript figures.
You might want to configure it t
David R. Morrison wrote:
A major new release of teTeX is imminent. If anyone would like to help
me test it, I've got packages called "tetex-texmf-beta" and "tetex-beta"
for the current release candidate, in the experimental/dmrrsn CVS
module.
Dave,
I am still stuck in the install phase:
First
A major new release of teTeX is imminent. If anyone would like to help
me test it, I've got packages called "tetex-texmf-beta" and "tetex-beta"
for the current release candidate, in the experimental/dmrrsn CVS
module.
-- Dave
---
This SF.NET
14 matches
Mail list logo
