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
/
tex-k-archive.gz
/
tex-k-archive
/
000264_tim@maths.tcd.ie_Mon Feb 7 12:57:53 1994.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1994-10-11
|
2KB
Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA06315
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <tex-k@cs.umb.edu>); Mon, 7 Feb 1994 12:57:53 -0500
Received: from hamilton.maths.tcd.ie by salmon.maths.tcd.ie
Via SMTP (FibreOptic) id aa17249; 6 Feb 94 11:37 GMT
Subject: Re: -g vs. -O
To: "K. Berry" <kb@cs.umb.edu>
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 1994 11:37:23 (GMT)
From: Timothy Murphy <tim@maths.tcd.ie>
Cc: tex-k@cs.umb.edu
In-Reply-To: <199402051204.AA17481@terminus.cs.umb.edu> from "K. Berry" at Feb 5, 94 07:04:45 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 855
Message-Id: <9402061137.aa13823@hamilton.maths.tcd.ie>
>
> If someone wants to try -O, I think they *should* have to know
> what they're doing, and that it may fail.
>
Karl,
My point is that you have been so successful
that many of the people now installing UnixTeX --
eg under Linux --
know little or nothing of subtle points like -g vs -O.
I feel you should aim for an installation regime
which allows users hopefully just to say
"configure", "make", "make install".
I haven't checked with TeX,
but some programs are 10 times as large under Linux
if compiled with -g and not stripped.
Incidentally, I am having problems with web2c-6.1,
under Linux and also on a Mips Magnum.
I think they are due to the double //
which the standard script gives
in the _middle_ of /usr/local/lib/texmf/fonts//tfm .
I wonder if anyone has succeeded with 6.1
as supplied by Karl, ie without altering paths.h.in ?
Tim