[tex-live] cleaning up of tree

George N. White III aa056 at chebucto.ns.ca
Mon Feb 9 16:19:02 CET 2004

On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Karl Berry wrote:

>        bitstrea -> bitstream
> Is there any pressing reason to do so?

A lot of code needs to examined for problems with spaces, etc. in
filenames, so it is not the worst time to be removing legacy code. The
advantage of using the longer names while updating an existing package is
that you can simplify scripts that could be vulnerable to name clashes
when truncating, e.g., code like the following excerpt from texfont.pl:

     { my $ven = $vendor ; $ven =~ s/(........).*/$1/ ;
       my $col = $collection ; $col =~ s/(........).*/$1/ ;

If you have looked into texfont.pl, you know that simplications would be

> I'd be inclined to keep the existing names, but not worry about 8.3 in
> new names.  Which is basically what we're doing anyway.

The question is how badly will things break if, while revising an
existing package, longer names are assumed/used?

George N. White III  <aa056 at chebucto.ns.ca>
  Head of St. Margarets Bay, Nova Scotia, Canada

More information about the tex-live mailing list