[tex-live] Re: antomega [was: Multilingual LaTeX: Greek, English, and UTF-8]

[Staszek Wawrykiewicz]

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Alexej Kryukov wrote:

> I am unsure I understood this. Can you explain what do you call "exact
> specification"? 

I mean that people would receive just plain text file what was changed, 
what to do with files, etc. A small sample file for the test would be 
also welcome...

> At least I suppose I do my best to keep antomega as
> well distinguished as possible by giving unique names to all my files
> and placing them to unique directories. 

What to do with, e.g., tex/lambda/base/UT1omlgc.fd? Should it be rather
ut1omlgc.fd, as you've described in your manual? Morever, if you could try
the current TDS recommendations (I know, still not perfect), your package
would be more easy to install, as well to incorporate to the current
distributions.

> If this is not sufficient,
> please tell me what else should be done in order to simplify including
> antomega into an official distribution like TL.

Well, the best way is to cleaning all files relating omega, lambda
and antomega, and againg refreshing them from CTAN (which should be
the only source for TL, howgh!). I'm ready for doing that, but please
do not beat me if I don't include things not documented or not more 
supported, like those from R. Pournader and A. Syropoulos, etc.

> > As I see, this document is somehow outdated in regard of the thread
> > already discussed here [Omega and the recent changes in TDS], so
> > perhaps it would be fine to adapt it to (some) conclussions taken. 
> 
> For now, no acceptable solution has been found for the problem I
> described in that thread. I am still awaiting an answer from Karl
> and others and hope the problem can be resolved soon. May be I
> have to initiate a similar discussion in the TDS list too.

Well, well.. Have you noticed that even TL2004 produced lambda.fmt using
your hyphen.cfg (from antomega)? Anyway (but only after your
explanations), I'm quite sure that antomega should be propagated as
*standard* for all distributions. It is no problem for adding
TEXINPUTS/omega/ocp, as Karl decribed in the other mail...
 
> > Can antomega be run with aleph (lamed), which is 
> > considered as runable and enough (as the users say) stable omega
> > based engine? 
> 
> To my surprise, it can't, because processing some of my OCP rules
> (absolutely correct to my mind) causes compilation errors! I suppose
> this is a bug in aleph, but probably I have to ask in the alpeh mailing
> list.
 
Ahh, really bad news. Could somebody using aleph comment that?

-- 
Staszek Wawrykiewicz
StaW at gust.org.pl