[tex-live] texlive 2003 -- acronym package missing doc
sebastian.rahtz at computing-services.oxford.ac.uk
Wed Feb 11 13:28:16 CET 2004
Harald Harders wrote:
> In my opinion, it is one of the main tasks to define a procedure that
> guarantees the documentation to be installed, too. At work, I have a teTeX
> installation with all documentation installed. It is nice simply to type
> in "texdoc packagename" and to get the documentation.
I agree, its good if that works. With either decent
metadata; a sufficiently intelligent installation script; or
a reasonable anount of time, it would be possible to achieve
this. Unfortunately we don't have any of those!
> But this is problematic because you don't know how often it has to be
> compiled, which extra programmes have to be used (e.g., makeindex, bibtex,
I run all of them, always, on every file, several times.
> Weren't it possible to test whether doing latex on the dtx file
> compiles without error and if so take the precompiled dvi or pdf file?
how do I know what the dvi or PDF file is made from?
how do I know which dtx file to run?
> Have you spoken with Thomas Esser how he chooses the documentation file
> for teTeX? I've never had problems with missing documentation files there.
Thomas is a lot more careful than me, is the simple answer.
And has to deal with quite a lot smaller collection of packages.
my answer is, as always, metadata.
Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager
Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
More information about the tex-live