[tex-live] preliminary test image for TeX Live 2005
Gerben.Wierda at rna.nl
Fri Sep 9 22:16:55 CEST 2005
On 9 Sep 2005, at 17:11, Vladimir Volovich wrote:
> "KB" == Karl Berry writes:
> KB> In general, I don't see that these minor discrepancies between
> KB> arches are a problem. Obviously something to minimize, but in my
> KB> mind it is not on the critical path.
> OK. Gerben, please compile pdfopen and pdfclose for darwin (powerpc
> and i386), if it will not be a problem for you.
I answered this in a different message.
> We will add bbox and ps2eps to the source tree after a release, then,
> so in this year's release only darwin builds will have them (and in
> those archs who's builders don't mind to build them separately).
> Among other discrepancies which would be nice to fix:
> * epstopdf in darwin builds differs from what we have in other archs
> (and in the source.development tree). Gerben, why is that? why do
> you not put differences into the common source tree, but prefer to
> have some differences present only in your darwin builds?
Years ago I fixed epstopdf because it was not robust for the mess of
line endings on Mac OS X. When I offered it to the maintainer(s) I
got the reply that he/they was working on an overhaul anyway. If have
in the years after now and then contacted him/them again but nothing
came from it. I don't remember who it was I mailed with at the time.
I am not inclined to overwrite something in TL when it is part of
someone else's work, I do not feel I should be that presumptuous. I
contact them instead and it is up to them to use it or not. In this
case, using the original is not possible for me). Besides, I
generally follow the strategy to get something fixed at the source
and if that does not work, fix it locally. TL is for me an
intermediate source for my redistro and fixing it there while it is
not fixed at the source I find a dangerous strategy because that way
a fixed bug might suddenly reappear if the original maintainer drops
in a new version.
> * texdoc in darwin builds is outdated. the file in source.development
> was updated on 2005/08/03, so again it is unclear why darwin's
> binaries do not match what is in source tree.
This was a leftover of the time that texdoc was not as smart as it is
now (today with different settings for different systems) and it only
worked properly on Linux and friends (starting acroread, a bit like
pdfopen/pdfclose I imagine). In my build Makefile it was still being
overwritten by a patched old one. I was unaware that texdoc had been
improved in TL. I have therefore now stopped overwriting for the
current release (TL2004 still had one that needed patching).
A next build will have the default texdoc. Thanks for spotting this.
More information about the tex-live