Re: [OffTopic] Curious to know whether latex2html is current?

2001-07-26 Thread Alan Shutko


Neil Zanella [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Either way some gif images will be created when typesetting math
 and other stuff like chemistry etc.. if that is what you want.
[...]

True.  But the nice thing about latex2html is that you can use it to
take a 500pg LaTeX document and put it on the web.  You would _not_ do
that with dvi2bitmap.  They serve completely different needs.

-- 
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
Violence is molding.




Re: Problem compiling teTeX on IA-64

2001-07-18 Thread Alan Shutko


Olaf Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 That's odd: the C standard took a lot of care to ensure that implicit
 declarations would, in fact, continue to work.  So this sounds like
 there is a possible conformance issue with the compiler and/or
 standard library lurking here.

Not quite.

The C standard took a lot of care that a programmer could use implicit
declarations for her own functions, but I'm not entirely sure that it
guarantees that library functions will work without the headers.  A
bit of research turns up Section 7.1.7 of ISO 9899-1990:

Provided that a library function can be declared without reference
to any type defined in a header, it is also permissible to declare
the function, either explicitly or implicitly, and use it without
including its associated header.

It does seem through a cursory look at the functions that all their
arguments are of types which you'd get through normal promotion (in
the case of implicit declarations)

Maybe this helps someone, but I'm still unsure.

-- 
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
Everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die.



Re: xdvi.bin and xdvi.real

2001-06-20 Thread Alan Shutko


Eckhard Hoeffner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 I do not know, if this is a debian-problem or a teTeX-problem. 

Debian problem.  Check out
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=100126archive=no

-- 
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
Cats have 9 lives.  Do radioactive cats have 18 half-lives?




Re: [tex-k] secure mode of dvips should be default

2001-06-01 Thread Alan Shutko

Tomas G. Rokicki [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Yeah, but people don't distribute .dvi files, do they?

Sure they do.  There are DVI docs distributed with many binary
distributions of tetex, the Emacs manual is being distributed to
proofreaders in DVI, and there are a bunch in various places on the
web.

-- 
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
Custer committed Siouxicide.



Re: pdflatex vs. latex | dvips | ps2pdf

2001-04-23 Thread Alan Shutko

Clemens Ballarin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Thanks for the help on getting dvips to use type 1 fonts!
 
 It turns out that ps2pdf doesn't take advantage of those fonts.

It should, though you need a recent enough version of Ghostscript.  At
a minimum, 6.0, although 6.50 or 7.00 will do a better job.

-- 
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
Green light in A.M. for new projects.  Red light in P.M. for traffic tickets.




Re: now I think this is a bug

2000-12-12 Thread Alan Shutko

Mate Wierdl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Perhaps one should collect the necessary defines from the .h files
 into a single one, and send it along with try2.c to the gcc
 developers so that they have a standalone test suite. 

That would be a good idea, but if you're using the RHL7 gcc, you
should send the report to the RH folks, not the gcc folks.  

-- 
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
There's no such thing as pure pleasure; some anxiety always goes with it.




Re: isolated the problem

2000-12-12 Thread Alan Shutko

Mate Wierdl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 If people verify this also with the original glibc (not the updated
 one), I'll submit a bugreport to gcc (and leave this list alone).

Verified with updated libc... don't have the original handy.  Please
don't send it to GCC, send it to http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/
.  Red Hat is maintaining the compiler they shipped.

If you don't want to hassle with Bugzilla, let me know and I'll do it.

-- 
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
This sentence no verb.




Re: now I think this is a bug

2000-12-11 Thread Alan Shutko

Tom Kacvinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 I thought it was a known fact that Red Hat boobooed and used a
 *prerelease* version of gcc (2.96) to make the system libs and what
 not for RH 7.0.  Which is probably the cause of the problems.  I
 don't know what to recommend in this case.  

The proper thing to do is to try to isolate it to a test case and
submit it to bugzilla.  Jakub Jelinek is extremely responsive and will
run it down as either a GCC bug or app bug, and will fix it.

-- 
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
IBM: Inherently Bad Manuals