[tex-live] Having a .fmt for different engines
jonathan_kew at sil.org
Fri Jan 5 14:13:54 CET 2007
On 5 Jan 2007, at 12:53 pm, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Here is a fix for two things:
> - TeXs idea of engine is not the binary, use texengine settings
> - --missing needs a kpsewhich call with -engine=$texengine
> This patch applies on top of yours!
Thanks for this. Presumably recreate_existing() also needs "-engine=
$texengine" added to the kpsewhich command; I've done that in my copy
here. The revised patch against TL, incorporating your fixes, is
attached for reference.
However, the question that remains is whether this is a change that
we want to make at this time.
Personally, I'd say yes (once people have tested it!); I think it's
harmless to "normal" users, while allowing more advanced/complex
setups to work more easily. I don't agree with Reinhard's statement:
> But there is a good reason not to change the TDS: At the moment Taco
> is merging the functionality of aleph into pdftex and he plans to add
> the functionality of xetex to pdftex too. As far as format files
> are concerned we just need a workaround, not a final solution. The
> issue we are discussing here will not exist any more in about two
IMO, it's too early to know what the future of the pdftex project is
going to be, and how soon we might converge on a single engine. And
in any case, it's entirely possible that around the same time as
xepdflualephtex <grin> is completed, some new idea will spring up and
give us another variant engine, which we'll need to support for a few
The architecture is pretty much there to allow engine-specific
subdirs, and it seems like a sensible thing to do. If in a few years
time it proves to be redundant, it still won't be doing any harm.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 5897 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/attachments/20070105/465c1c64/attachment-0001.obj
More information about the tex-live