On Sun, 7 Apr 2019, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 4/6/2019 8:49 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2019, Alan Braslau wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 13:46:57 -0400 (EDT)
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Is there a way to avoid that? I can, of course, set different values of
TEXMFCACHE for both distributions,
On 4/6/2019 8:49 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2019, Alan Braslau wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 13:46:57 -0400 (EDT)
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Is there a way to avoid that? I can, of course, set different values of
TEXMFCACHE for both distributions, but does it make sense to to use a
diffe
On Sat, 6 Apr 2019, Alan Braslau wrote:
On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 13:46:57 -0400 (EDT)
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Is there a way to avoid that? I can, of course, set different values of
TEXMFCACHE for both distributions, but does it make sense to to use a
different hash (5fe67e...) for the two?
Why do
On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 13:46:57 -0400 (EDT)
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
> Is there a way to avoid that? I can, of course, set different values of
> TEXMFCACHE for both distributions, but does it make sense to to use a
> different hash (5fe67e...) for the two?
Why do you set TEXMFCACHE
and not simply kee
Hi,
I am currently using mkiv and lmtx in parallel and noticed that both use
the same texmf-cache subdirectory. Running:
mtxrun --script cache --list
gives
mtx-cache | writable path:
/home/adityam/texmf-cache/luatex-cache/context/5fe67e0bfe781ce0dde776fb1556f32e
mtx-cache |
mtx
