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/[e-mail]_Sat May 7 22:58:13 1994.msg

Internet Message Format | 1994-10-11 | 2KB

Received: from inn.amtp.cam.ac.uk by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA02755
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <[e-mail]>); Sat, 7 May 1994 16:58:40 -0400
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from rayleigh.amtp.cam.ac.uk [131.111.16.156] (TAP id = jp107)
    by inn.amtp.cam.ac.uk with smtp
    (Smail-3.1.28.1 #1) id m0pztRu-0001GyC; Sat, 7 May 94 21:58 BST
Received: by rayleigh.amtp.cam.ac.uk (1.38.193.4/DAMTP 2.0-Client (rayleigh.amtp.cam.ac.uk MX-hub grey.amtp.cam.ac.uk))
    id AA00448; Sat, 7 May 1994 21:58:13 +0100
Date: Sat, 7 May 1994 21:58:13 +0100
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Re:  suggestion for xdvik-1.8
Cc: [e-mail]
From: Jon Peatfield <[e-mail]>

Well you can do that test in MakeTeXPK without having to edit the xdvi
source...  In fact since the same test needs to be done in dvipsk as
well this is clrealy better.

In practice xdvik doesn't actually care much about the type of fonts
it is using (they are onyl for screen display), and those for dvips(k)
can easily be set on a per-printer basis using the printer specific
config files...

As to the second change, the MakeTeXPK we use prints lots of messages
to the screen so users certainly don't think nothing is happening.
They may get confused by these messages though.

-- Jon Peatfield

Jon Peatfield, Computer Officer, the DAMTP, University of Cambridge
Telephone: [phone]     Mail: [e-mail]

"Try gargling with TCP  --  UDP just isn't reliable"