texlive 2008?
ivo...@gmail.com
summer in the US is officially over on labor day, so I thought I would
ask about texlive 2008. is it about to come out? regards, /iaw
PS: yes, I am a TUG member.
Will Robertson
> summer in the US is officially over on labor day, so I thought I would
> ask about texlive 2008. is it about to come out?
Yep :)
(But I don't know any exact dates, either.)
Will
Robin Fairbairns
when is labour day, for that matter?
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
ivo...@gmail.com
on Monday...unless we are talking rest of the world, where it is on
May 1 ;-).
Dan
> summer in the US is officially over on labor day,
This is untrue. Labor day is the _traditional_ (not official) end
of summer _vacation_ (i.e., the school year starts. It is also the
traditional time to switch from summer to fall wardrobe ("Don't
wear white after labor day").
In Arkansas summer ends sometime in October and school starts
in August. The "official" end (if such a thing exists) is the
autumnal
equinox, around Sept. 21.
The USA Labor Day holiday (a bank holiday) is the first Monday
in September.
> ask about texlive 2008. is it about to come out?
You can read the developers discussions at
http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/
Last I looked: "In a couple of days".
Dan
Victor Ivrii
Well it's out (last night).
So this year TL came just before Labor Day which this year
occasionally coincided with September 1
Juergen Fenn
Victor Ivrii schrieb:
> Well it's out (last night).
Yep. Here's the announcement:
http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/2008-September/017391.html
Jürgen.
Robin Fairbairns
of course, tug.org has footling anon connection limits, since they
don't consider that they're an appropriate source of downloads. which
is why my mirror of the sources has only just completed: i had the
mirror parameters wrong for last night's mirror run, and it's taken me
until now to run corrected parameters.
so now there's *no* reason to go to tug.org for texlive, since all
three main ctan sites will have it rsn (we all had the dvd image
within minutes of the announcement, but i've only just pushed a
replacement source out).
these things are *big* -- the texlive dvd iso is well over 1gbyte,
lzma compressed (i dread to think what it would be using zip, as we
did last year).
you can also install over the network -- see ctan
systems/texlive/tlnet/2008/install-tl or
systems/texlive/tlnet/2008/install-tl.bat
(i've not tried this yet: i've not got an experimental machine at
home, and i'm not well enough to spend significant time at work.)
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Sebastian Szwarc
>
> you can also install over the network -- see ctan
> systems/texlive/tlnet/2008/install-tl or
> systems/texlive/tlnet/2008/install-tl.bat
>
> (i've not tried this yet: i've not got an experimental machine at
> home, and i'm not well enough to spend significant time at work.)
When will be 2008 packages build for Suse and Ubuntu?
There will be need to use MPM to update packages?
Sebastian Szwarc
Lars Madsen
usually the linux binaries are compiled for architectures not flavors,
so they are already there
/daleif
Sebastian Szwarc
>> Sebastian Szwarc
>
> usually the linux binaries are compiled for architectures not flavors,
> so they are already there
>
> /daleif
I dont understand what do you mean by "flavour"
Ubuntu uses DEB SUSE uses RPM so they are different build, and for now I
only see 2007 version of TL in Ubuntu repos.
Sebastian
Thomas A. Schmitz
> I dont understand what do you mean by "flavour" Ubuntu uses DEB
> SUSE uses RPM so they are different build, and for now I only
> see 2007 version of TL in Ubuntu repos. Sebastian
The question when SuSE, Ubuntu, or Fedora makes rpms/debs/whatever
available for their distribution is answered by the maintainers of
the linux distribution, not by the TeXLive maintainers; they have
nothing to with this. They provide the infrastructure, and the
distribution's maintainers have to repackage it for their
customers. So your question belongs neither here nor on the
TeXLive mailing list, but in the Ubuntu forums.
Thomas
Rolf Niepraschk
...
>
> I dont understand what do you mean by "flavour"
> Ubuntu uses DEB SUSE uses RPM so they are different build, and for now I
> only see 2007 version of TL in Ubuntu repos.
>
You should use the original TeXLive 2008 in addition (!) to any
distribution specific packages (.deb,.rpm). Then you have an actual TeX
distribution with the new package manager.
...Rolf
mpg
> There will be need to use MPM to update packages?
>
Hum, mpm is MikTeX's package manager... with TeX Live, I'd rather recommend
tlmgr: TeX Live manager ;-)
Manuel.
Lars Madsen
If you download the ISO (or I guess through the new network installer)
you can choose the architecture, not a particular flavor of linux (like
redhat, ubuntu etc.) and install that.
What you are refering to are the various Linux packing systems, dep vs.
rpm, and as others have said, that is not a job for the TeXLive people.
That is a job for the destributions. There are already debian packages
available (because of great work of a Debian guy merging TeXLive into
Debian). Whether the other distributions would like to offer TeXLive in
their systems (instead of the antique teTeX, that is up to them).
/daleif
Sebastian Szwarc
>
> You should use the original TeXLive 2008 in addition (!) to any
> distribution specific packages (.deb,.rpm). Then you have an actual TeX
> distribution with the new package manager.
>
> ...Rolf
On the contrary..distribution specific packages contain ALL distribution
of current TexLive.
I use both on Ubuntu and Suse texlive 2007 packages together with MPM
because only this provided package update feature.
TL2007 is shipped without such tool so, distribution you call "original
texlive" is useless on unix system.
Even if you install texlive from cd some packages like Kile will still
install with texlive again because tl is in their dependancies.
I'm sure that TL will be updated soon in all specific distro's repo
together with its installer and there will be no need to install from dvd.
I wonder if TL guys finally modified kpathsea library to provide
on-the-fly package installation?
Sebastian Szwarc
Juergen Fenn
Sebastian Szwarc schrieb:
> I wonder if TL guys finally modified kpathsea library to provide
> on-the-fly package installation?
<http://www.tug.org/texlive/doc/texlive-en/texlive-en.html#x1-410006>
Jürgen.
Karl Berry
package installation a la miktex, hooking into the "file not found"
case. It was enough of a stretch to support dynamic updates for the
first time via tlmgr, as Juergen pointed to. Maybe we will catch up
to MiKTeX in the realm of on-the-fly someday, but I don't advise
holding your breath :).
The original TeX Live is not "useless" on Unix systems. It may be
useless for you, but not everyone wants to rely solely on their
distro's packaging system.
karl
mpg
Anyway, the answer is no, and I don't even think this is planned.
Manuel.
Don
> The original TeX Live is not "useless" on Unix systems. It may be
> useless for you, but not everyone wants to rely solely on their
> distro's packaging system.
It's definitely not useless. TeXLive is the most important component
of my system, and I install it from the ISO image while ignoring my
distros' repositories (Debian on my desktop, Kubuntu on my laptop).
Since it's such a vital part of my work environment, I personally want
absolute control over it; I don't want to rely on my distros' package
repositories. And that's really only one example of when TeXLive is
extremely useful.
Sebastian Szwarc
So we do not agree in this point. It is generaly not wise thing IMO to
ignore distro specific repoitories,as well as distro's dependancies if
you think different maybe you dont exactly 'feel' the linux, ESPECIALLY
Ubuntu which I see you use.
I dont understand in which point you do not have a control when using TL
from repos?
As I said I use TL2007 and have control what to install and what not to
install with miktex package manager that is in my opinion great tool (it
should be even included in Ubuntu main repo at least in 8.04.)
I could say rather that using TexLive from the ISO result in lost of
control and messing the system. I tried this and will not return to TL
from ISO in Ubuntu and Suse anymore.
I dont work so much time on MacOS so didn't have possibility to test
MacTeX, and on XP the best solution for me is MikTex.
Regards
Sebastian
Sebastian Szwarc
n't use it because he should always to know what he has in his system?
Maybe so, but sometimes it is not so simple.
Please do not misunderstand me - I appreciate much work of TL team,
however it seems strange to me that such talented group of people cannot
introduce from many years a simple feature. For Christian Shenk it was
not so difficult. That's why his distribution at least in Windows world
is the first among others. (in my department wherever I ask there is
MikteX not TexLive and I am sure my dep is no unique in that matter).
Regards
Sebastian
Juergen Fenn
Sebastian Szwarc schrieb:
> As I said I use TL2007 and have control what to install and what not to
> install with miktex package manager that is in my opinion great tool
Sebastian, you might like to note that using the MiKTeX package manager
was a work-around for those running TeX on a *ix platform. Now that we
have a generic package manager included in TeX Live 2008 we don't need
an external tool any more. Tlmgr of course should be preferred to mpm
because mpm is not part of TeX Live. What's more, mpm cannot update TeX
Live binaries.
Jürgen.
Don
> ignore distro specific repoitories,as well as distro's dependancies if
> you think different maybe you dont exactly 'feel' the linux, ESPECIALLY
> Ubuntu which I see you use.
Seeing as how I've been running Linux since the summer of 2000, when I
installed Debian when doing so was approximately equivalent to banging
one's head repeatedly against a brick wall, I hope you'll forgive me
for asserting that I quite assuredly "'feel' the linux." I'm surely
not one of the true ancients of Linux, but I think I've got enough
experience with it to qualify as reasonably competent. I'm currently
running Kubuntu 8.04 on the laptop (wifi support is the principle
reason), and Debian stable on my desktop. Both are running TeXLive.
> I dont understand in which point you do not have a control when using TL
> from repos?
Repos are wonderful things, but they're not the holy grail. If I were
to install TeXLive via the repos, I'd be limited to the versions that
are supported by my repos; I'd be confined to their update schedule,
rather than my own. When I wanted to update to TeXLive 2008, I'd have
to sit around waiting for them to provide an updated version. If, on
the other hand, I wanted to keep TeXLive 2007, then every time I tried
to update the rest of my software I'd have to specifically instruct
aptitude not to download TeXLive updates. Furthermore, keeping
TeXLive 2007 alongside TeXLive 2008 (for whatever reason; this is not
something I personally do) would require some significant effort,
whereas installing from the ISO makes this trivial.
> As I said I use TL2007 and have control what to install and what not to
> install with miktex package manager that is in my opinion great tool (it
> should be even included in Ubuntu main repo at least in 8.04.)
It's useful, but as has been said, now that TeXLive has a similar tool
it shouldn't be necessary to continue using it. I've never used mpm
on a Linux system, and I've never missed it.
> I could say rather that using TexLive from the ISO result in lost of
> control and messing the system. I tried this and will not return to TL
> from ISO in Ubuntu and Suse anymore.
What precisely got messed up on your system installing from the ISO?
I've never had a blink of a problem with it, personally, on either
Debian or Kubuntu.
Don Goodman
Juhapekka Tolvanen
Lars Madsen <dal...@imf.au.dk> writes:
> There are already debian packages available (because of great work of
> a Debian guy merging TeXLive into Debian).
Do you mean TeX Live 2008 is already available as Debian-packages? If
so, where are those packages?
--
Juhapekka "naula" Tolvanen * http colon slash slash iki dot fi slash juhtolv
"ore wo mitsumeteiru anata sama wa ossharu bakari. kesshite dakiyosete wa
kurenai ooki na anata no te. ore no tanjoubi ni wa ai wo kai ataeru. kyou wa
kumori nochi ame." Dir en grey
Robin Fairbairns
>mpg pisze:
>> Le (on) mardi 02 septembre 2008 22:15, Juergen Fenn a écrit (wrote) :
>>> Sebastian Szwarc schrieb:
>>>
>>>> I wonder if TL guys finally modified kpathsea library to provide
>>>> on-the-fly package installation?
>>> <http://www.tug.org/texlive/doc/texlive-en/texlive-en.html#x1-410006>
>>>
>> Does this document really answers the question about on-the-fly install?
>>
>> Anyway, the answer is no, and I don't even think this is planned.
>
>n't use it because he should always to know what he has in his system?
>Maybe so, but sometimes it is not so simple.
that's just plain silly. the tex live team have decided that, with
the effort available, they can't make that change.
>Please do not misunderstand me - I appreciate much work of TL team,
>however it seems strange to me that such talented group of people cannot
>introduce from many years a simple feature. For Christian Shenk it was
>not so difficult. That's why his distribution at least in Windows world
>is the first among others. (in my department wherever I ask there is
>MikteX not TexLive and I am sure my dep is no unique in that matter).
miktex is a first rate distribution, for sure. (i still don't
understand how the commercial and shareware offerings manage to
compete with it.)
how do you _know_ that christian didn't find it difficult? for all
i know (i've never asked him), he might have spent several months on
that one (seemingly small) feature.
(and of course, christian is an exceptional programmer. there are
quite a few of those about, but harnessing them to free projects they
don't want to work on, tends to be difficult.)
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Lars Madsen
>
> Lars Madsen <dal...@imf.au.dk> writes:
>
>> There are already debian packages available (because of great work of
>> a Debian guy merging TeXLive into Debian).
>
> Do you mean TeX Live 2008 is already available as Debian-packages? If
> so, where are those packages?
>
>
ask on the TexLive list, there is usually a debian guy how have been
through most of the packages, to fix licenses etc. So I would assume
that TeXLive can be found in the repos.
--
/daleif (remove RTFSIGNATURE from email address)
LaTeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
LaTeX book: http://www.imf.au.dk/system/latex/bog/ (in Danish)
Remember to post minimal examples, see URL below
http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=minxampl
http://www.minimalbeispiel.de/mini-en.html
Karl Ove Hufthammer
> you can also install over the network -- see ctan
> systems/texlive/tlnet/2008/install-tl or
> systems/texlive/tlnet/2008/install-tl.bat
I used the network install on Linux, and it seems to have worked very well,
even with custom installation paths.
I have one question, though. In the ‘Installation’ tab in ‘tlmgr --gui’,
every possible package is listed, that is, even the ones I already have
installed (which I guess is all of them). Is it supposed to look like this,
or is this a bug?
Showing the already installed packages doesn’t seem to be of any use (except
for the ’Remove’ tab, of course). I would rather just like to see the
packages that are *not* installed (which for me would be ‘new’ packages,
that I might consider installing).
--
Karl Ove Hufthammer
Robin Fairbairns
>Lars Madsen <dal...@imf.au.dk> writes:
>
>> There are already debian packages available (because of great work of
>> a Debian guy merging TeXLive into Debian).
>
>Do you mean TeX Live 2008 is already available as Debian-packages? If
>so, where are those packages?
i doubt it. if lars is talking about the same guy i'm thinking of, he
was only back from his summer "amusement"[*] on monday. so he'll need
some time to catch up. (he's already sent a *lonng* answer to a
thread he and i had before he went away.)
[*] i use the word advisedly. i'm sure it would be real fun for
someone capable of doing the job, but that's not (and never has been)
my sort of person.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
mpg
>>> There are already debian packages available (because of great work of
>>> a Debian guy merging TeXLive into Debian).
>>
>> Do you mean TeX Live 2008 is already available as Debian-packages? If
>> so, where are those packages?
>>
> ask on the TexLive list, there is usually a debian guy how have been
> through most of the packages, to fix licenses etc. So I would assume
> that TeXLive can be found in the repos.
>
TeX Live can be found in the Debian Main, but it's still TL07. Since the
whole TL infrastrucutre changed, a big part of the TeX Live -> deb script
has to be rewritten so it may take some time.
And yes, one of the very active TL upstream developpers is also one of the
very active TeX Live in Debian developpers so he is very aware of what to
do and just needs time to do it.
Manuel.
mpg
> As I said I use TL2007 and have control what to install and what not to
> install with miktex package manager that is in my opinion great tool (it
> should be even included in Ubuntu main repo at least in 8.04.)
>
So you agree that you have control by using something else than your
distro's packages.
> I could say rather that using TexLive from the ISO result in lost of
> control and messing the system. I tried this and will not return to TL
> from ISO in Ubuntu and Suse anymore.
Good for you: that's why Linux distro's packages exits. So that people who
prefer them can use them. But your use (and taste) is not everyone's need.
Manuel.
mpg
>> Anyway, the answer is no, and I don't even think this is planned.
>>
> Perhaps you think this feature is only for fun and true TEXnician should
> n't use it because he should always to know what he has in his system?
> Maybe so, but sometimes it is not so simple.
>
Did I say something like that? Honestly, I'm not the kind of people who
would say that (I'd probably not use such a feature myself, but I
understand it can be useful to others).
That the feature is not planned for the near future dosn't mean we don't
think it's interesting.
> introduce from many years a simple feature. For Christian Shenk it was
> not so difficult.
As Robin pointed, it's not because he succeeded that is was easy. Moreover,
it's a bit difficult to compare TeX Live with MikTeX: TeX Live runs on a
quite large variety of platforms, while MikTeX is only for windows; TeX
Live is not only installed as the TeX Live from the DVD, but also
repackaged my distros... I'm not saying that Christian's job in MikTeX is
easy (I'm really amazed how he can maintain MikTeX alone), but that
saying "if MikTeX can do it, then it should be easy to do in TeX Live" is a
bit unfair.
Just a simple question: since you say you use only TeX Live from your Linux
distro's repositories, who should the on-the-fly-install feature deal whith
your distro's packaging system? Certainly one can find an answer to this
question, but also certainly the question doens't even arise in the MikTeX
case.
> That's why his distribution at least in Windows world
> is the first among others. (in my department wherever I ask there is
> MikteX not TexLive and I am sure my dep is no unique in that matter).
>
I think everyone here agree that MikTeX is a very good distro.
Manuel.
Robin Fairbairns
>I could say rather that using TexLive from the ISO result in lost of
>control and messing the system. I tried this and will not return to TL
>from ISO in Ubuntu and Suse anymore.
however, if it doesn't bother dan, why shouldn't he do it?
fwiw, back in the deeps of time, redhat stuck with tetex 2 *long*
after tetex 3 was released, so i built a tetex 3 for our redhat
machines and we created a dummy rpm which pretended to be a redhat
standard tex installation, for the dependencies. worked fine, for
ages.
i don't know if you can pull the same trick with .debs, but the
"artificial" rpm is a nice and flexible tool in this circumstance.
(and i'm amazed that you should be suggesting mpm rather than tlmgr
for the repos...)
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Lars Madsen
> Perhaps you think this feature is only for fun and true TEXnician should
> n't use it because he should always to know what he has in his system?
> Maybe so, but sometimes it is not so simple.
>
> Please do not misunderstand me - I appreciate much work of TL team,
> however it seems strange to me that such talented group of people cannot
> introduce from many years a simple feature. For Christian Shenk it was
> not so difficult. That's why his distribution at least in Windows world
> is the first among others. (in my department wherever I ask there is
> MikteX not TexLive and I am sure my dep is no unique in that matter).
>
> Regards
> Sebastian
another problem is the large multiuser systems. What should an "install
if missing" mean here? Clearly it cannot be installed into the main
system, as the package might be experimental and break other stuff. So
ok, we install X at the local user. Ok, then I as the sysadmin, upgrade
the LaTeX dist, and a newer version of X, now the student come and
complain about X being broken because it does not not do as the (new)
manual described (bacause the system found his old version first).
The "install if missing" is really nice on single user systems (when the
mirrors are correctly updated). But might not be good on multiuser systems.
/daleif
Paul Vojta
Robin Fairbairns <rf...@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>i don't know if you can pull the same trick with .debs, but the
>"artificial" rpm is a nice and flexible tool in this circumstance.
Yes, in fact there's a Debian package, called "equivs", whose sole purpose
is to create such artifical .debs.
--Paul Vojta, vo...@math.berkeley.edu
Sebastian Szwarc
>
> Repos are wonderful things, but they're not the holy grail. If I were
> to install TeXLive via the repos, I'd be limited to the versions that
> are supported by my repos; I'd be confined to their update schedule,
> rather than my own. When I wanted to update to TeXLive 2008, I'd have
> to sit around waiting for them to provide an updated version. If, on
> the other hand, I wanted to keep TeXLive 2007, then every time I tried
> to update the rest of my software I'd have to specifically instruct
> aptitude not to download TeXLive updates. Furthermore, keeping
> TeXLive 2007 alongside TeXLive 2008 (for whatever reason; this is not
> something I personally do) would require some significant effort,
> whereas installing from the ISO makes this trivial.
>
here with portage and slot mechanism...
Sebastian
Sebastian Szwarc
>
> i don't know if you can pull the same trick with .debs, but the
> "artificial" rpm is a nice and flexible tool in this circumstance.
>
> (and i'm amazed that you should be suggesting mpm rather than tlmgr
> for the repos...)
It is not my suggestion..MPM IS in official Ubuntu repos.
and because I have never seen tlmgr on Ubuntu MPM was suggested by
Schenk for updating and upgrading TeXMF tree.
And in fact I am not quite sure if this tool cannot update also tex
binaries..
I had a problems with xetex and fontspec on suse but after mpm update
xetex updated to newer version and now it works like a charm.
I know, mpm is a bit unorthodox approach maybe in Unix world..but it works.
Sebastian Szwarc
Sebastian Szwarc
>
> The "install if missing" is really nice on single user systems (when the
> mirrors are correctly updated). But might not be good on multiuser systems.
>
> /daleif
Yes I agree, it could be a challenge to solve this problem.
it also depends of what you mean by multi-user system.
On university servers it can be one system tex installation so even with
multi-user acces you may only e.g. allow users to create their local
texmf tree and give to this directory precedense in processing by
tex,latex,pdflatex
Sebastian
Robin Fairbairns
>> (and i'm amazed that you should be suggesting mpm rather than tlmgr
>> for the repos...)
>
>It is not my suggestion..MPM IS in official Ubuntu repos.
>and because I have never seen tlmgr on Ubuntu MPM was suggested by
>Schenk for updating and upgrading TeXMF tree.
i appreciate that you're not writing your own language, but i had a
very clear idea that you were suggesting exactly thus.
and as for "never seen tlmgr on ubuntu" ... it's not exactly
surprising that the ubuntu people haven't caught up with something
that was first released on monday.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
mpg
> It is not my suggestion..MPM IS in official Ubuntu repos.
Great. Since how long? I'm rather surprised, because there was a discussion
recently about packaging it for Debian, and apparently nobody there was
aware that there's already a .deb for it in Ubuntu.
I've been using mpm for some time in the texmf-local of my Debian's TeX Live
2007, and although I often had problems with corrupted repos, in is a quite
convenient tool.
Of course now that tlmgr is out, I'd recommend it to manage a TL install.
> and because I have never seen tlmgr on Ubuntu
Sure. tlmgr is out only since 3 days : the Ubuntu guys cna't be that
fast :-)
> And in fact I am not quite sure if this tool cannot update also tex
> binaries..
I'm quite sure it can't on Linux: the MikTeX repositories only have Windows
binaries...
> I had a problems with xetex and fontspec on suse but after mpm update
> xetex updated to newer version and now it works like a charm.
??? Maybe fontspec was updated, but certainly no the XeTeX binary.
> I know, mpm is a bit unorthodox approach maybe in Unix world..but it
> works.
>
I don't see what you mean, unorthodox. It's perfectly "normal" for me.
Manuel.
mpg
> The "install if missing" is really nice on single user systems (when the
> mirrors are correctly updated). But might not be good on multiuser
> systems.
>
Agreed. But this functionnality can be disabled (at least, it was disabled
on the last MikTeX installation I saw, so...) and this is IMHO the best
solution for multi-user environments: just disable it.
Anyway, multi-user installations usually have not disk space problem sothey
can just install the whole distro, and then on-the-fly install is of little
use, since everything is already installed :-)
Manuel.
Sebastian Szwarc
>>
> I don't see what you mean, unorthodox. It's perfectly "normal" for me.
>
> Manuel.
>
For me too, but you can always find 'orthodox' linux users, who e.g.
never install x-window environment or use something what isn't written
in asembler :P and they perhaps would tell you that best way to install
TL is manual compilation from source ]:->
Sebastian
Sebastian Szwarc
> Sebastian Szwarc <beyo...@tlen.pl> writes:
> i appreciate that you're not writing your own language, but i had a
> very clear idea that you were suggesting exactly thus.
I am simply not able to write in english things about which I'm thinking
in Polish :)
Sebastian
Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
'Orthodox' does not mean that... there are considerably
more precise adjectives available!
-- m
Steve Hicks
'Fundamentalist', maybe? I suppose 'orthodox' gives unnecessary
credence to the view, seeing as it literally means 'right doctrine'.
Cheers,
steve
Dan
> Victor Ivrii schrieb:
>
> > Well it's out (last night).
>
> Yep. Here's the announcement:
>
> http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/2008-September/017391.html
Which says in part:
"I'll wait until tomorrow to send a bigger announcement to the
general TeX lists, to give propagation a bit longer to happen."
Which is why I didn't say it was already out (as it was when
I wrote my reply), but instead waited for Karl to officially
announce it to c.t.t. He did that later in the day, after robin
had a chance to mirror it to CTAN.
I feared that a premature statement (for example at
7:42am Monday :-) would cause a run on CTAN before
the mirroring was complete (which happened around
1:29pm Monday).
Dan
Sebastian Szwarc
> 'Fundamentalist', maybe? I suppose 'orthodox' gives unnecessary
> credence to the view, seeing as it literally means 'right doctrine'.
>
> Cheers,
> steve
Maybe you're right, in polish we often uses these two adjectives the
same way, when 'orthodox' means someting like 'traditional' :)
Sebastian
David Kastrup
And they need only half as many letters.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
UKTUG FAQ: <URL:http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html>
Robin Fairbairns
>I feared that a premature statement (for example at
>7:42am Monday :-) would cause a run on CTAN before
>the mirroring was complete (which happened around
>1:29pm Monday).
actually, by the time i noticed that the mactex part of the mirror
update had failed, the "run" had started on tug.org, so my mirror
connections couldn't get in. i had to go out that afternoon, so left
the mirror trying ... and by the time i got back it had completed.
at which time i was able to push the stuff out to the dante and tug
ctans. so the announcement was premature, but in a way that no-one
could have predicted.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge