[tex-live] Bug in updmap?!

[Gerben Wierda]

On 29 Oct 2004, at 12:20, Vladimir Volovich wrote:

> "FP" == Fabrice Popineau writes:
>
>>> So is this *really* necessary?
>
>  FP> yes.
>
> Here's how I see this (somewhat confusing :).
>
> currently updmap on unix supports only syntax like
> "--enable Map foo.map"
>
> currently updmap on windows (your ported version) is incompatible with
> unix and requires a different syntax:
> "--enable Map=foo.map"
>
> Even if Thomas adds new syntax "--enablemap foo.map", he wants to
> preserve the current behavior for compatibility.
>
> Then, presumably, you will add such suntax to your ported updmap too,
> and we will have 3 variants of syntax instead of 2 as we have now.
>
> Also, unix's updmap will support only 2 of them:
> "--enable Map foo.map" and "--enablemap foo.map"
> but and windows' updmap will support only 2 of them
> "--enable Map=foo.map" and "--enablemap foo.map"
>
> I.e. adding --enablemap option will not make updmap on unix and on
> windows completely compatible: they will still be uncompatible, unless
> you implement support for "--enable Map foo.map" syntax.
>
> So if they will not be compatible (read: if you will not add support
> for "--enable Map foo.map" syntax), then the answer "yes" is unclear.
>
> And if they will be compatible (read: if you will add support for
> "--enable Map foo.map" syntax), then why bother with adding
> "--enablemap foo.map".
>
> Still, even if you add support for "--enable Map foo.map",
> unix's updmap is not going to add support for "--enable Map=foo.map".
>
> Therefore, i think that the BEST solution to this problem is
> for you to REPLACE syntax "--enable Map=foo.map" in your ported updmap
> with syntax "--enable Map foo.map" (and do not support it at all).
> And do not change updmap on unix at all.

I agree completely. updmap on Windows is a port of updmap on unix. The 
fact that you have not ported it as is now suddenly means that I have 
to rewrite and add to my stuff and that is a lot of work. Unless Thomas 
drops the old syntax in which case a lot of makefiles, scripts etc in 
the unix world will break (including mine).

Personally, I agree with Vladimir. You want a port of the updmap too. 
Fine. You port the updmap tool. It is not that much work to parse the 
options as updmap does it with perl, you just can't use getopt.

> That will make updmap compatible on both unix and windows, and will
> make the number of different variations on syntax minimal.

G