[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: texlive 2009 - should set TEXMFCNF?

2009/10/30 Jindrich Novy <jnovy redhat com>:
> I'm presenting a complete list of packages shipped in TeX Live to
> discuss another possible obsoletions:
> dvipdfm
> dvipdfmx

I think the latest TeXLive doesn't include dvipdfm as its
functionality is now covered by dvipdfmx. Anyway, In both cases I am
the packager, and would rather see the texlive variant shipped and the
packages obsoleted.

> xdvi
Again, would prefer if we obsoleted the separate package and went with
the texlive variant. Here however we may need to shipp a separate
package for the japanese patched version. Or we could integrate the
japanese patch into texlive - this may need some work though, as the
japanese patch seems to be unmaintined presently. Longer term I hope
xdvi just goes away, as its functionality increasingly gets added to
evince - xdvi is only minimally maintained at this point and is
rather... crusty.

> dvipng

Yep, we should simply go with the texlive version - I am happy with
this, as dvipng maintainer.

> xdvipdfmx

I'm not primary maintainer of this one, but again, I think we should
go with the texlive shipped version (which is ahead of the version
available as a separate tarball).

Let me know if you need any help with this.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]