Re: Release?
On 2002-05-30 21:28:01 +0200, Harald Hanche-Olsen wrote: > Um, yeah, but spring is already over, even as far north as I live. It Springs ends on --06-21 :-) Best regards Martin -- http://www.tm.oneiros.de
Re: Release?
+ Martin Schroeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: | Expect a new pdfTeX (1.01a) this Spring. :-) Um, yeah, but spring is already over, even as far north as I live. It is now summer here (though some will call it "the green winter"). But maybe you are referring to spring in the southern hemisphere? In which case I won't be holding my breath waiting. - Harald
Re: Why VARTEXMF instead of (say) TEXMFCONFIG ?
Thomas Esser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [lots of good information] > Hope, this is helpful somehow... Thank you, it is very helpful. I am trying to work out some ideas for dealing with ongoing texmf-related upgrades of various kinds on a multi-user system and I hope to write up my thoughts pretty soon in the form of an online article that anyone can read who wants to. But in the process of doing this I realized that I needed to better understand the origins and intent of some things like VARTEXFONTS and VARTEXMF.
Re: Why VARTEXMF instead of (say) TEXMFCONFIG ?
> I am thinking over the problem of maintaining a complex TeX system with > several TDS trees (on a Unix computer), looking at documentation such as One main question to answer is the degree of integration into the linux system. Sure, you can split teTeX into several directories, e.g. put config files somewhere below /etc, variable runtime data somewhere into /var etc. In my opinion, you should only do that if you have a good reason to do so. If you focus on your linux system and have special needs for backup, system configuration etc., you should go the "linux way". If you focus on TeX and want to have an easy way of upgrading, running multiple instances of teTeX / TeX Live etc. it recommended to keep each TeX installation in its own directory tree. > What does the "VAR" mean in VARTEXMF? Well, why care about names? It is the semantic that defines things, not their name. VARTEXMF is a special name, because it defines the texmf tree where you want to keep variable configuration data. Some scripts (e.g. the upcoming updmap in today's teTeX-beta or TeX Live 7 and texconfig) use the VARTEXMF to detect your intention that you want to put changed / new files there, rather than into TEXMFMAIN. > intended use of VARTEXMF seems rather different. As near as I can tell a > more accurate name for VARTEXMF would be TEXMFCONFIG. This directory tree does not only store configuration files, but also format files etc., so in unix terms "variable runtime data". > (Is this a texk question rather than a teTeX question?) It is a teTeX question, since "texk" has no script which assigns a special semantic to VARTEXMF. All those scripts (texconfig, fmtutil, the new updmap) have been written for teTeX. > FHS recommendations without preconceived notions. I suppose some of > these questions are better asked on an FHS mail list but if anyone As I said above: I would ignore the FHS unless you have a good reason to follow it. > ---What is difference between /opt and /usr/local? I.e., what is the > best "main" location for teTeX? Why? You should have a convention for putting additional software to your system (I mean something that does not come with your linux distribution). For teTeX, just follow that convention. In the department of the university where I have previously worked (with the name dbis), we have decided to use /software/dbisfor locally developped stuff /software/pay for things we have to pay for /software/oss for the rest. You see, I don't really care about names; not everything here is really open source, e.g. the acrobat reader. Below these directories, we have grouped applications into categories, e.g. Editors, Networking, Databases, Development. teTeX ended up in /software/oss/Text/teTeX-1.0. > /usr/local for anything obtained elsewhere? (If that is indeed true, I > think I would rather have a top level /local directory instead of > /usr/local.) /local sounds great. It won't conflict with anything else. > not included in teTeX, what about making a common parent directory to > hold both teTeX and the other packages: Not a bad idea... > The FHS description of the /usr/share area makes it seem that all the > run-time TeX input files for LaTeX and similar should go here. Or, how If you really want to share things between different systems, you need to find a strategy about how to do it. nfs, rsync whatever. If you don't need that, then don't care about these special directories. > to be extremely slow. And also format files are not yet generated on > demand, last I knew? Although it would be feasible if sufficient fmtutil Today's teTeX-beta and TeX Live 7 will generate format files "on demand". Hope, this is helpful somehow... Thomas
Why VARTEXMF instead of (say) TEXMFCONFIG ?
I am thinking over the problem of maintaining a complex TeX system with several TDS trees (on a Unix computer), looking at documentation such as kpathsea.info, teTeX-FAQ, TETEXDOC.tex, and http://www.pathname.com/fhs (Filesystem Hierarchical Standard). I am puzzled in particular in trying to understand: What does the "VAR" mean in VARTEXMF? There is a small mention of TeX in the FHS documentation already (using /var/cache/fonts for auto-generated font files), and if I understand correctly this is where the "VAR" comes from in VARTEXFONTS. But the intended use of VARTEXMF seems rather different. As near as I can tell a more accurate name for VARTEXMF would be TEXMFCONFIG. (Is this a texk question rather than a teTeX question?) Suppose that one wanted to attempt to follow the FHS insofar as reasonable. Many questions are unclear to someone who simply reads the FHS recommendations without preconceived notions. I suppose some of these questions are better asked on an FHS mail list but if anyone reading this is willing to share their opinion I think other teTeX users would also be interested. For example: ---What is difference between /opt and /usr/local? I.e., what is the best "main" location for teTeX? Why? /opt/teTeX ? /usr/local/teTeX ? Is /opt only for additional packages provided by your Unix vendor, and /usr/local for anything obtained elsewhere? (If that is indeed true, I think I would rather have a top level /local directory instead of /usr/local.) But here are some more quotes about /opt: Generally, all data required to support a package on a system must be present within /opt/, including files intended to be copied into /etc/opt/ and /var/opt/ as well as reserved directories in /opt. ... Distributions may install software in /opt, but must not modify or delete software installed by the local system administrator without the assent of the local system administrator. Considering also that there are TeX-related packages out there that are not included in teTeX, what about making a common parent directory to hold both teTeX and the other packages: /opt/texstuff/teTeX ? /usr/local/texstuff/teTeX ? ---What about /usr/share/texmf? The FHS description of the /usr/share area makes it seem that all the run-time TeX input files for LaTeX and similar should go here. Or, how much of this should better go into /opt/share or /usr/local/share instead? Why? The /usr/share hierarchy is for all read-only architecture independent data files. This hierarchy is intended to be shareable among all architecture platforms of a given OS; thus, for example, a site with i386, Alpha, and PPC platforms might maintain a single /usr/share directory that is centrally-mounted. Note, however, that /usr/share is generally not intended to be shared by different OSes or by different releases of the same OS. And then again, if you have material (such as a LaTeX package) that IS shareable across different OSes, does that mean it should go somewhere else? ---What can go in /var/cache? 5.5 /var/cache : Application cache data 5.5.1 Purpose /var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data is locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore the data. Unlike /var/spool, the cached files can be deleted without data loss. The data must remain valid between invocations of the application and rebooting the system. Files located under /var/cache may be expired in an application specific manner, by the system administrator, or both. The application must always be able to recover from manual deletion of these files (generally because of a disk space shortage). No other requirements are made on the data format of the cache directories. The first paragraph could be construed to cover TeX format files, but then one would want the "application specific manner" of expiring them to be extremely slow. And also format files are not yet generated on demand, last I knew? Although it would be feasible if sufficient fmtutil setup is done and tex had a mktexfmt script to go along with the other mktex... scripts. Regards, Michael Downes
Re: Release / status of teTeX
> As already mentioned in an announcement on the tetex-pretest list > >(http://www.mail-archive.com/tetex-pretest%40informatik.uni-hannover.de/msg00369.html) > you can have the latest teTeX beta (2002-04-02) _and_ the fix by applying > http://www.tug.org/teTeX/teTeX-src-beta-20020402-expdvips.patch.gz. > Afterwards the dvips(k) version is still 5.86g, but the bug is fixed > (at least for me). After some testing of the patch, it was applied to the main version of dvips and the version number was increased. So, a patched 5.86g is about the same as the new 5.90a. Thomas
Re: Release / status of teTeX
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Erik Frisk wrote: > Hi, > > > The -G1 option in dvips (can be activated on the commandline or in a > > config file; typically it is enabled in config.pdf) turn on a feature > > named "character shifting". This works around bugs in various other > > software, by shifting characters of a font to the "upper" area of a > > font. This works well e.g. with CM fonts, but it fails if the upper > > slots are not free in the font. > > Yes, this I have noted and have therefore commented out G in config.pdf > Which softwares has bugs that make character-switching necessary? The "bug" is the use of a zero byte to mark the end of a string in standard C strings (you lose \Gamma and math minus). Problems have been seen in early versions of Acrobat Reader, and many drawing programs that claim to import PS files. Since the native graphics API's on most common platforms use C strings, character shifting remains useful in situations where you want to import a PS file or translate it to another format. One notable exception was NeXTStep, which used Display PS and Objective-C. -- George White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Halifax, Nova Scotia
Re: Release / status of teTeX
Thomas Esser wrote: >> >>I, for another reason, updated to the latest teTeX beta (2002-04-02) and >>the dvips version included is: >> >>>dvips --version >> >>dvips(k) 5.86g >>kpathsea version 3.3.7 > > > The *next* teTeX pretest will have that fixed dvips. TeX Live 7 won't > have that fix. But, Sebastian is working on a "TeX Live Special Edition > for TUG 2002" which will also have that fix, I guess. As already mentioned in an announcement on the tetex-pretest list (http://www.mail-archive.com/tetex-pretest%40informatik.uni-hannover.de/msg00369.html) you can have the latest teTeX beta (2002-04-02) _and_ the fix by applying http://www.tug.org/teTeX/teTeX-src-beta-20020402-expdvips.patch.gz. Afterwards the dvips(k) version is still 5.86g, but the bug is fixed (at least for me). +Thomas -- Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hahn-Meitner-Institut Berlin, Germany
