On 09/05/2017 23:13, Karl Berry wrote: > what is the reason for having two .def files here. > > I can't imagine an insurmountable technical reason for having two > independent .def files these days. Indeed, it would seem highly > desirable to me to merge them, with conditional parts as needed. It sure > was a pain to be applying changes to both independently, when I was > the one doing that.
'Yes' > One of the reasons I was so happy to turn them over > to you guys :). Well the ideas originate from the team ... you'll see for expl3 we've gone back to 'one definite source' as the number of drivers is nowadays small and predictable. > As I expect you know, they currently exist separately because of their > historical development. xetex.def was based on dvipdfmx.def at the time > of creating XeTeX. And that was reasonable during active XeTeX > development. And so it has continued to the present day. But nowadays, > when dvipdfmx and xdvipdfmx themselves have been (sort of) merged > (thanks always to Khaled ...), merging the .def files too seems good. OK, I'll probably work on this but not before TL'17 release: somewhat risky and not something I'd want to put on the DVD. (I will send the latest update to CTAN to fix the issue concerning scaling of links.) Joseph -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
