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]_Mon Jun 27 07:04:38 1994.msg

Internet Message Format | 1994-10-11 | 4KB

Received: from stat.ufl.edu by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA24535
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <[e-mail]>); Mon, 27 Jun 1994 12:18:33 -0400
Received: from lobster.stat.ufl.edu (lobster.stat.ufl.edu [128.227.141.104]) by stat.ufl.edu (8.6.8.1/8.6.8) with SMTP id LAA28519; Mon, 27 Jun 1994 11:02:02 -0400
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] (Pierre MacKay)
Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: Re: switching versions of LaTeX
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 25 Jun 1994 10:16:48 PDT."
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 1994 11:04:38 -0400
From: Brett Presnell <[e-mail]>


I don't know if things on the archives have changed again in the last
couple of days, but there is one more "problem" with making the
LaTeX2e/PSNFSS stuff work with the latest Xdvik at least.  If you
install the pk files from psfonts.tar.gz in order to make xdvi display
the PostScript fonts (This is necessary, right?  I keep wondering if
I'm missing something.), and if you use the PSNFSS .fd files from the
fonts/metrics area of CTAN files, well, it won't work directly.

Sebastion Rahtz has assumed that Karl Berry's most recent remarks
about the "virtual/raw distinction" in version 1.6 of "Filenames for
TeX Fonts" were meant to be implemented, but Karl hasn't done so
himself.  Part of the conflict is fixed, as Pierre MacKay mentioned,
by appending the additional font aliases provided in CTAN's
fonts/metrics to dvips's psfonts.map.  This is described in some of
the documentation from Sebastion Rahtz.  However, another problem
arises with respect to xdvi and the fonts in psfonts.tar.gz: the names
of the pk files in pstfonts.tar.gz start with "r" for raw, while the
.fd files in fonts/metrics expect them to have a "0" before the ".".
So if you use PSNFSS, xdvi ends up looking for, e.g., ptmr0.300pk
which isn't there, so it substitutes cmr10.300pk (or something like
that).  Anyway, I "fixed" this at our place by creating the obvious
links.  (The remaining problem is the "rounding bug".)

Question: Is the "0" thing to be implemented, or was it just a remark?
If just a remark, what is to be done about the fact that it is being
implemented?

Another question:  Do any related issues arise because of the Cork
encoding?  I don't think so, but what do I know?

BTW, the other conflict that Pierre mentioned between what many
(most?)  people probably use for PostScript fonts in LaTeX (some
incarnation of NFSS and associated .sty files from Sebastion Rahtz)
and the versions of times.sty, etc. as distributed with dvips has
existed for about 2 years now.

I agree with Pierre that basically the installation of LaTeX2e and
it's friends (particularly PSNFSS) is just not "obvious" enough, at
least not for someone in a hurry, and this has been stated by myself
and others in comp.text.tex.  Our system adminstrator, not being a
TeX/LaTeX hacker, is certainly not knowledgeable enough to handle
Web/Dvipsk/Xdvik + LaTeX2e + required-add-ons + other-fonts (+
LaTeX209?) by himself with the current incarnations of the many pieces
of stuff that one needs to download.  It would be nice if an ordinary
system administrator could manage to do this.  Maybe it would helpful
for Karl (and Pierre?) to get in touch with Sebastion Rahtz so that at
least the conflicts between Karl's stuff and Sebastion's could be
cleaned out.  In general, a little more communication between the UNIX
TeX maintainers and the LaTeX2e/LaTeX3 developers might be very
useful.

P.S.: I do not mean to complain too loudly, since I greatly appreciate
the fantastic efforts of everyone involved.  I'm also not aware of how
much communication already exists between the UNIX TeX folks and the
LaTeX3 folks, but it certainly seems from the outside that more
communication would help, and I don't think that it matters who
initiates it.

--------
Brett Presnell        [e-mail]