TeX 1995 July/TeX CD-ROM July 1995 (Disc 1)(Walnut Creek)(1995).ISO/tex-k/tex-k-archive.past/1995.02/[e-mail]_Thu Feb 16 05:22:53 1995.msg

Internet Message Format | 1995-02-28 | 4KB

Received: from albert.gnu.ai.mit.edu by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA19672
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <[e-mail]>); Thu, 16 Feb 1995 10:23:06 -0500
Received: from hill.gnu.ai.mit.edu by albert.gnu.ai.mit.edu (5.65/4.0) with SMTP
    id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 16 Feb 95 10:22:57 -0500
Received: by hill.gnu.ai.mit.edu (15.11/4.0)
    id <[e-mail]>; Thu, 16 Feb 95 10:22:53 est
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 10:22:53 est
From: [e-mail]
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]> ([e-mail])
Subject: Re: m68k-sony-newsos build

   As others will probably tell you, the second half of your problems
   were because you did not have the library files installed in a way
   that the tex and mf programs could find them. ...
   ...

   There has been much debate over exactly how extensive the results
   should be when you just "go for it" and type 'configure && make';
   everyone has their own opinion.

Ha! My expectation was that the safest, most likely to succeed
procedure was to `just go for it'.  My presumption was that every
thing was set up in the `usual' places and that by `just going for it'
I would cause the *least* confusion or trouble.  False expectation!

(I might add that I just upgraded disk and OS, so I have been building
lots of packages the past few days: in other packages, my presumptions
have led to the right actions.)

Also, the documentation says that web2c is what you need for `TeX,
Metafont, and friends'.  I presumed that working with web2c would be
the least trouble, since all I wanted was TeX, Metafont, and friends.
(TeX built successfully, so in a literal sense, what I got is what was
necessary; but that is not the point.)

It was not clear to me that lib.tar.gz was needed.  Indeed I, thought
the opposite, since the doc says "you must decide on your directory
structure *before* doing the compilations", which suggested to me that
`lib.tar.gz' was for doing complicated things I wanted to avoid.  I
wanted to use the default directory structure, not invent one.  On
rereading that sentence, I can see how it can be interpreted to mean,
`you don't need to decide on your own structure, but follow the
default', but that is not what it appeared to mean when I first read
it.

Also, I misunderstood web2c-6.1 to be a top level directory for
creating TeX and Metafont (and by implication, that it contained
everything for TeX, Metafont, and friends).  This was a mistake; again
the documentation was not clear to me.

This all suggests that an overall INSTALL file be named in some clear
fashion, and that it say what is needed very clearly and concisely for
a novice.  And that INSTALL or README files in what turn out to be
directories that are lower in the build, like web2c-6.1/README,
contain sentences that explain that they are at a lower level and that
a top level INSTALL file should be consulted if you `just want to go
for it'.

It sounds that `lib.tar.gz' should be incorporated into a
`tex-top-level-build.tar.gz' and not only include the fonts it has
now, but also the top-level INSTALL and Makefile, and a manifest of
other packages you must have.  `tex-top-level-build.tar.gz' should
untar into a tex directory, and when you typed `make', should copy
what is necessary to /usr/local/lib/texmf, and then run the Makefile
in web2c.

Incidentally, after building TeX, I changed to the `dvipsk-5.58f/'
directory, typed `configure', and then `make', and then `make
install', and everything worked fine.  Here is a situation where my
mental model of what ought to be done corresponded to the real world;
and following the instructions actually worked.

    Robert J. Chassell               [e-mail]
    25 Rattlesnake Mountain Road     [e-mail]
    Stockbridge, MA 01262-0693 USA   [phone]