On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 20:50 +0100, Dave Crossland wrote: > 2008/7/25 Vasile Gaburici <vgaburici gmail com>: > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Nicolas Mailhot > > <nicolas mailhot laposte net> wrote: > >> — We should not hide general-purpose fonts in app-specific directories. > >> TEX should use system fonts directly. > > > > XeTeX can do that. TeX probably NEVER will because that violates TDS. > > If you don't what that means, then don't take on the subject of TeX > > fonts. > > I second the idea that TeX ought to be an exception to the guideline > "not hide general-purpose fonts in app-specific directories"; TeX > predates all other programs in a GNU/Linux system, and TeX users have > hardended expectations about how it works; if Fedora's TeX package > fiddles with things, that will be a loss for users. We're under a *nix. The TEX packagers can symlink the files to TEX internal directories if that makes TEX users feel better. Though we've been resorbing various private font repositories in the past years (starting with the xorg ones) and mid term I don't see how TEX can escape the trend. That's the bad thing of switching to a common font format. (The good thing being of course that you get access to the fonts other groups provide) > (I'm still not getting Nicolas' emails :-( I'm routing lab6.com through another smtp now. Of course that won't change mails sent directly to the list. Someone is blackholing me between Red Hat servers and yours. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part