home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TeX 1995 July
/
TeX CD-ROM July 1995 (Disc 1)(Walnut Creek)(1995).ISO
/
tex-k
/
tex-k-archive.past
/
1995.02
/
000122_kb@cs.umb.edu_Sun Feb 19 01:23:17 1995.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1995-02-28
|
2KB
Received: from ra.cs.umb.edu by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA03919
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <tex-k-exp@cs.umb.edu>); Sun, 19 Feb 1995 06:23:18 -0500
Received: by ra.cs.umb.edu id AA24385
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for tex-k); Sun, 19 Feb 1995 06:23:17 -0500
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 06:23:17 -0500
From: "K. Berry" <kb@cs.umb.edu>
Message-Id: <199502191123.AA24385@ra.cs.umb.edu>
To: tex-k@cs.umb.edu
Subject: Re: m68k-sony-newsos build
Actually, I think the programs and input files
should be dealt with separately --
rather like gcc and glibc or libg++.
In other words, "make" wouldn't try to make the format and base files;
this could be done by a Makefile in lib.tar.gz.
TeX/MF won't run at all without the formats.
That's why I think web2c should make them by default.
It's true they also won't run at all without the other input files
(cmr10.tfm, plain.mf, etc.). But those files are not
implementation-dependent and/or not automatically generated.
I don't think the problem is that web2c generates plain.{fmt,base}.
The problem is that it doesn't give a sensible error message (go unpack
lib.tar.gz, read unixtex.ftp, and use kpathsea debugging flags) when it fails.
it would be satisfying to say "configure" and "make"
and find a dozen programs made successfully.
I agree. Make a unixtex.tar.gz file. There's no particular reason why
there couldn't be a distribution with all of *dvi*k and web2c (and
whatever else) with one top-level Makefile, etc. I just don't want to
be the one to create/distribute/maintain such a thing. At least not
until after the next web2c release.