[tex-live] where are we going?

Sebastian Rahtz sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Mon Jun 9 08:58:16 CEST 2003

On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 09:21, Thomas Esser wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 02:48:38PM +0100, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> >  b) shall we use the current set of binaries, or compile a new set from
> > source.development?
> Well, afaik, the differences between source / source.development are
> (resp. should be):
>   - libtool (in source.development) instead of klibtool (in source)
>   - new tex.web in source.development
and fixes to pdftex, dvips and cjk utilities

> That libtool vs. klibtool stuff causes a lot of differences in all
> drivers' Makefiles etc. Maybe, source should follow source.development,
> except for the new tex.web? I know that e.g. Karl would very much prefer
> the new tex.web for TL8, but I think that breaking e-TeX and Omega is
> not worth it...

plus the fact that this strange thing eomega does not compile  at all at
present (change file error).

my inclination is to promote only the changes to cjkutils, dvips and
pdftex from source.development to source, and hope that this can be done
faily painlessly. 

The libtool upgrade is a Good Thing, if we can easily promote that as

I share Thomas' reluctance to promote the unconfirmed changes to etex
and omega, just to get the tex.web in.


More information about the tex-live mailing list