installing new packages under mactex and texshop
Michael B. Williams
I have started using a package that does not come with the mactex
distribution, namely cleveref. I have the cleveref.sty file, and
currently if I want to use it I have to keep it in the same directory
as the tex file I am working on.
so, I would like to find out how I can install this package so that I
can use \usepackage{cleveref} from any tex document on my computer.
when I compile I see that texshop looks in the directory /usr/local/
texlive/2007/texmf-dist/tex/latex/ for the standard packages, such as
amsmath. so in this directory I created a new directory cleveref, and
dropped the sty file in it. unfortunately when I try to compile it
says it is missing the cleveref.sty file.
anyone know how I can install this package with my current set up?
thanks
Peter Flynn
See
http://latex.silmaril.ie/formattinginformation/chapter5.html#installpkg
for "where to put stuff", or refer to the FAQ at
http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=inst-wlcf
///Peter
Enrico Gregorio
Don't put packages not coming with the main distribution there. Rather
use /usr/local/texlive/texmf-local; otherwise the added file will
vanish when an update to the main distribution will be done.
From the Terminal, assuming you are in the directory where the
package files are:
% sudo mkdir -p /usr/local/texlive/texmf-local/tex/latex/cleveref
% sudo mv cleveref.sty /usr/local/texlive/texmf-local/tex/latex/cleveref
% ...(do the same for the other files)...
% sudo mktexlsr
Here "%" stands for the shell prompt, which will be different.
You can also navigate to /usr/local/texlive/texmf-local in the Finder
and copy the files this way. However you'll need to give the
sudo mktexlsr
anyway from the Terminal. If you don't know about "sudo", just do
as stated, giving your password when requested. Of course, this
assumes you are an administrator of the machine. The "mktexlsr"
command makes TeX know about the added files.
Another way is to put the package files in
~/Library/texmf/tex/latex
(~ stands for your home directory). Other users of your machine will
not be able to use the added package, though. With this technique the
"mktexlsr" command is not needed.
Ciao
Enrico
Rowland McDonnell
> Michael B. Williams <mbw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am using the mactex distribution with texshop as my front end.
> >
> > I have started using a package that does not come with the mactex
> > distribution, namely cleveref. I have the cleveref.sty file, and
> > currently if I want to use it I have to keep it in the same directory
> > as the tex file I am working on.
> >
> > so, I would like to find out how I can install this package so that I
> > can use \usepackage{cleveref} from any tex document on my computer.
> >
> > when I compile I see that texshop looks in the directory /usr/local/
> > texlive/2007/texmf-dist/tex/latex/ for the standard packages, such as
> > amsmath. so in this directory I created a new directory cleveref, and
> > dropped the sty file in it. unfortunately when I try to compile it
> > says it is missing the cleveref.sty file.
> >
> > anyone know how I can install this package with my current set up?
>
> Don't put packages not coming with the main distribution there. Rather
> use /usr/local/texlive/texmf-local;
I use my own parallel `system wide local additions' texmf tree with
MacTeX 2007. I have a folder:
/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm
and it all goes in there - it's a lot easier to get to than the
invisisble folders used by MacTeX.
To do this takes a minor modification to texmf.cnf, but I find it
convenient - especially since I don't need to run mktexlsr/texhash.
[snip]
How did I do it? Well, according to my *VERY* rough notes on the
subject, the full installation process took these steps:
[Note that the document below is written for my use - so it's got
instructions for adding UK English hyphenation to my LaTeX format, and
unplugging Babel. But since I've written this drivel and there's a
question on the subject, here we go - it's been turned into a LaTeX-able
document in the hope that makes it slightly more manageable for `a
reader who's not me'. Information supplied without any guarantee of
fitness for purpose and entirely unchecked - but the document below is
the notes I made for me to use for my own benefit.
(and for those who wonder why I take a while to finish a document -
well, given that what I write usually starts off looking like something
below, it's understandable, innit?)
And if anyone's got any news on whether or not printing's ever going to
be fixed in TeXShop, I'd love to hear it.]
=======================================================================
\documentclass[a4paper]{article}
\usepackage[pdftex]{graphics}
\usepackage{url}
\begin{document}
\section{You're in trouble if you're reading this}
MacTeX 2007 instructions:
\subsection{Procedure}
Run MacTeX installer
Paths: modify texmf.cnf
Founts: modify updmap.cfg and update ?? by running updmap-sys.
Formats: create rmlatex.ltx (hyphen mods)
Modify fmtutil.cnf and create new formats by running
\begin{verbatim}
sudo -sudo -H fmtutil-sys --all --cnffile
/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
\end{verbatim}
?
Get url.sty v3.3 from CTAN and add to texmf.rjmm. url.sty v3.2 has a
bug that screws up XeTeX without Babel.
\subsection{texmf.cnf}
\begin{verbatim}
kpsewhich texmf.cnf
find / -name "texmf.cnf"
\end{verbatim}
From: Maarten Sneep
On line 114 of \url{/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf} the
TEXMF
variable is set:
\begin{verbatim}
TEXMF = {$TEXMFCONFIG,$TEXMFVAR,$TEXMFHOME,!!$TEXMFSYSCONFIG,!!
$TEXMFSYSVAR,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFDIST}
\end{verbatim}
Add your tree before that line, thus:
\begin{verbatim}
TEXMFRM = /Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm
\end{verbatim}
and modify line 114 to
\begin{verbatim}
TEXMF = {$TEXMFCONFIG,$TEXMFVAR,$TEXMFHOME,$TEXMFRM,!!
$TEXMFSYSCONFIG,!!$TEXMFSYSVAR,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFDIST}
\end{verbatim}
MS:
I don't think you'll need to modify SYSTEXMF. This tree is used for
generated fonts, and the default will be just fine. Besides you'll
need to make sure that some permissions are set correctly if a tree is
going to be suitable for this type of use. At least that is how I read
the comments.
\subsection{Founts 2007 instructions}
Make a copy of either:
/usr/local//texlive/2007/texmf/web2c/updmap.cfg
/usr/local//texlive/2007/texmf-var/web2c/updmap.cfg
add the lines:
\begin{verbatim}
# Rowland's stuff:
Map local_extras.map
\end{verbatim}
Put the resulting file into:
\url{/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-var/web2c/updmap.cfg}
(or maybe /usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-config/web2c/ but only var works
at the moment)
then run updmap-sys
\subsubsection{2006 instructions}
Add to:
\url{/usr/local/teTeX/share/texmf.local/web2c/updmap.cfg}
the lines:
\begin{verbatim}
# Rowland's stuff:
Map local_extras.map
\end{verbatim}
then run updmap-sys
This requires the file \url{local_extras.map}, which I keep:
\url{/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/fonts/map/}
\subsection{Formats and hyphenation 2007}
What needs doing:
Standard LaTeX loads Babel for hyphenation. Want to keep the standard
formats available, and also add other formats for use with UK
hyphenation doing it my way.
So I think I need
rmlatex.ltx as a copy of latex.ltx with call to hyphen.cfg replaced with
call to rmhyphen.cfg.
and put it in: texmf.rjmm/tex/latex/base/
Then modify a copy of this file:
\begin{verbatim}
hazelwood:~ iMac$ kpsewhich -format=web2c fmtutil.cnf
/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
\end{verbatim}
two identical copies:
\begin{verbatim}
hazelwood:~ iMac$ find /usr/local/ -name "fmtutil.cnf"
/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-var/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
\end{verbatim}
by adding:
\begin{verbatim}
#! Rowland's additions
rmlatex pdftex language.dat -translate-file=cp227.tcx
*rmlatex.ini
pdfrmlatex pdftex language.dat -translate-file=cp227.tcx
*pdfrmlatex.ini
xelatex xetex language.dat -etex xermlatex.ini
\end{verbatim}
And put result at:
\url{/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-var/web2c/fmtutil.cnf} (?)
\begin{verbatim}
texmf.rjmm/tex/latex/latexconfig
kpsewhich latex.ini
/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/latex.ini
/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/latex.ini
/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/xelatex.ini
/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/pdflatex.ini
/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/mllatex.ini
\end{verbatim}
Modify ini files referred to to call rmlatex.ltx rather than latex.ltx.
Rename them
\begin{verbatim}
latex.ini -> rmlatex.ini
xelatex.ini -> xermlatex.ini
pdflatex.ini -> pdfrmlatex.ini
\end{verbatim}
Put them:
\url{/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/tex/latex/latexconfig/}
(no need to modify a copy of this file:
\url{/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf-var/tex/generic/config/language.dat}
which is used by Babel. teTeX didn't include ukhyphen.tex; TeX Live
does)
Then peform this incantation:
\begin{verbatim}
sudo -sudo -H fmtutil-sys --all --cnffile
/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
(probably).
\end{verbatim}
Builds new formats.
Add these files to \url{~/Library/TeXShop/Engines/}
Note: chmod oug+x to set executable bit on each first:
\begin{verbatim}
Filename "XermLaTeX.engine"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
#!/bin/tcsh
set path= ($path /usr/texbin /usr/local/bin)
xetex -fmt xermlatex "$1"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
Filename "rmLaTeX.engine"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
-------------
#!/bin/tcsh
set path= ($path /usr/texbin /usr/local/bin)
pdfetex -fmt pdfrmlatex "$1"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
\end{verbatim}
\subsubsection{2006 instructions}
Modify this file:
\begin{verbatim}
Hattie:rowland rowland$ kpsewhich -format=web2c fmtutil.cnf
/usr/local/teTeX/share/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
\end{verbatim}
(modify a copy placed in /Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/web2c/)
by adding:
\begin{verbatim}
#! Rowland's additions
rmlatex pdfetex language.dat
-translate-file=cp227.tcx *rmlatex.ini
pdfrmlatex pdfetex language.dat
-translate-file=cp227.tcx *pdfrmlatex.ini
xermlatex xetex language.dat *xermlatex.ini
\end{verbatim}
Modify ini files referred to to call rmlatex.ltx.
/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/tex/latex/base/rmlatex.ltx
rmlatex.ltx is copy of latex.ltx with call to hyphen.cfg replaced with
call to rmhyphen.cfg.
/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/tex/latex/base/rmlatex.ltx
Re-build formats using this call:
\begin{verbatim}
sudo -sudo -H fmtutil-sys --all --cnffile
/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
\end{verbatim}
And create in /Users/rowland/Library/TeXShop/Engines/:
\begin{verbatim}
Filename "rmLaTeX.engine"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
#!/bin/tcsh
set path= ($path /usr/local/teTeX/bin/`uname -p`-apple-darwin-current
/usr/local/bin)
pdfetex -fmt pdfrmlatex "$1"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Filename "XermLaTeX.engine"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
#!/bin/tcsh
set path= ($path /usr/local/teTeX/bin/`uname -p`-apple-darwin-current
/usr/local/bin)
xetex -fmt xermlatex "$1"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
\end{verbatim}
\end{document}
=======================================================================
--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland....@dog.physics.org
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
Rowland McDonnell
<http://tug.org/mactex/whatgetsinstalledwhere.html>
is more directly applicable to MacTeX, insofar as `where to put stuff
you want to add' goes, anyway:
`Following standard TeX Live practice, the bulk of the distribution is
installed in /usr/local/texlive/2007, but a skeleton texmf tree for
local additions is provided in /usr/local/texlive/texmf-local.'
<http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=what-TDS>
is worth reading, even though it's not all directly applicable to
MacTeX.
Rowland.
Enrico Gregorio
What's the point? Do you really think that modifying texmf.cnf is
better than putting things into the already defined local tree?
I don't think so. Running mktexlsr is only a minor nuisance, once
we know it's necessary. No need to redo the whole mess when the
next MacTeX will arrive.
I'm no programming expert, but I believe that a simple program (an
Automator script, for example) could relieve the user from the more
obscure duties.
Ciao
Enrico
Rowland McDonnell
The point is that with (for example) gwteX, the system-wide local
additions tree was used for things not installed by the local user,
there's no particular reason to think that in future, the provided local
additions texmf tree will stay clear of such things in future.
I want to be 100% sure that nothing messes up the things I add. The way
to be sure of that is to define a new texmf tree - one that MacTeX
doesn't know about. Especially with what I've seen i-installer do in
the past... Who knows what might get over-written or deleted or added
where I don't want it and don't know about it?
I've had a lot of very bad experiences and this is a way of avoiding a
repeat of some of them.
> I don't think so. Running mktexlsr is only a minor nuisance, once
> we know it's necessary. No need to redo the whole mess when the
> next MacTeX will arrive.
I have a fair amount of re-doing of stuff to do when a new MacTeX
arrives in any case - unplugging Babel is not entirely trivial. It's
not a significant extra effort to modify texmf.cnf as well.
> I'm no programming expert, but I believe that a simple program (an
> Automator script, for example) could relieve the user from the more
> obscure duties.
Highly likely. But it's a lot easier to do it by hand than learn how to
automate it with what's available.
Rowland.
Peter Flynn
[snip]
> The point is that with (for example) gwteX, the system-wide local
> additions tree was used for things not installed by the local user,
> there's no particular reason to think that in future, the provided local
> additions texmf tree will stay clear of such things in future.
>
> I want to be 100% sure that nothing messes up the things I add. The way
> to be sure of that is to define a new texmf tree - one that MacTeX
> doesn't know about. Especially with what I've seen i-installer do in
> the past... Who knows what might get over-written or deleted or added
> where I don't want it and don't know about it?
You worry me. I'm considering a new laptop, and thinking now is the time
to move to a Mac. But you seem to be implying that MacTeX is unstable
with respect to its directory tree usage.
> I've had a lot of very bad experiences and this is a way of avoiding a
> repeat of some of them.
I used to do this with Unix and DOS/Win implementations until TeX Live
started to stabilize a bit. Even now it installs itself in a different
directory every year, as far as I can see.
> And if anyone's got any news on whether or not printing's ever going to
> be fixed in TeXShop, I'd love to hear it.]
What is the problem, exactly? I don't often generate paper myself, but
it would occasionally be useful.
///Peter
Herbert Schulz
Peter Flynn <peter...@m.silmaril.ie> wrote:
> Rowland McDonnell wrote:
> [snip]
> > The point is that with (for example) gwteX, the system-wide local
> > additions tree was used for things not installed by the local user,
> > there's no particular reason to think that in future, the provided local
> > additions texmf tree will stay clear of such things in future.
> >
> > I want to be 100% sure that nothing messes up the things I add. The way
> > to be sure of that is to define a new texmf tree - one that MacTeX
> > doesn't know about. Especially with what I've seen i-installer do in
> > the past... Who knows what might get over-written or deleted or added
> > where I don't want it and don't know about it?
>
> You worry me. I'm considering a new laptop, and thinking now is the time
> to move to a Mac. But you seem to be implying that MacTeX is unstable
> with respect to its directory tree usage.
>
Howdy,
MacTeX is very stable with its directory tree usage. The personal tree
(what most folks would use) has its root in ~/Library/texmf/ (~ is the
user's HOME directory) and `sudo texhash` need not be run. System wide
(i.e., for all users on a given system) should be rooted in
/usr/local/texlive/texmf-local/ (e.g., that's where I put fonts and
formats files for local users of the system) and you need to run `sudo
texhash` for use. (Of course `sudo updmap-sys' , etc., for fonts.) You
shouldn't be playing in sub-directories of /usr/local/texlive/2007/
since those will be updated with any updates of MacTeX 2007.
When MacTeX/TeX Live 2008 comes out it will be installed in
/usr/local/texlive/2008/ and use the the same
/usr/local/texlive/texmf-local/ so the local changes will be included.
MacTeX installs a System Preference Pane called TeX Distribution that
allows you to choose between installed TeX distributions so TeX Live
2007 and 2008 can live side by side. Nice for the squeemish or those
that are in the middle of something important. You choose which
distribution is active via a simple radio button.
Good Luck,
Herb Schulz
Simon Spiegel
>>
>>
>> I want to be 100% sure that nothing messes up the things I add. The way
>> to be sure of that is to define a new texmf tree - one that MacTeX
>> doesn't know about. Especially with what I've seen i-installer do in
>> the past... Who knows what might get over-written or deleted or added
>> where I don't want it and don't know about it?
>
> You worry me. I'm considering a new laptop, and thinking now is the time
> to move to a Mac. But you seem to be implying that MacTeX is unstable
> with respect to its directory tree usage.
No need to worry, Rowland is talking about some very esoteric stuff no
one else experienced yet besides him (and which have been fixed after
people have finally been able to actually understand what Rowland had
been doing). Check out the TeX on OSX mailing list if you're interested
in the details, but I can assure that these are not problems you will
ever encounter.
>
>> And if anyone's got any news on whether or not printing's ever going to
>> be fixed in TeXShop, I'd love to hear it.]
>
> What is the problem, exactly? I don't often generate paper myself, but
> it would occasionally be useful.
There is a problem with printing which is an Apple bug and has nothing
to do with TeXShop per se; t occurs for example with the mathpazo
package. It makes TeXShop crash. It really is annoying but it has
nothing to do to with MacTeX or TeXShop but with Apple's PDF system. It
only happens on Leopard, it didn' on OSX 10.4, and it doesn't happen
with Adobe apps which use their own PDF system. The bug has been
reported to Apple a long time ago, let's hope they finally fix it with
10.5.3
simon
Juergen Fenn
Peter Flynn schrieb:
> You worry me. I'm considering a new laptop, and
> thinking now is the time to move to a Mac.
Peter, you're absolutely right. I've switched to a MacBook in November
and I have no problems whatsoever teXing with OS X.4.11, MacTeX, Carbon
Emacs, and TeXShop as PDF previewer. I've been said that on Leopard you
can use Preview for viewing PDFs because Preview now can refresh a PDF
file already opened.
HTH,
Jürgen.
Peter Flynn
That'll do. I need something seriously light at the moment (Air) but I
also need sporadic access to Windows, and probably serious access to
Ubuntu or another Linux, so a triple-boot system would be nice.
///Peter
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
> MacTeX is very stable with its directory tree usage.
It has not proven so in my experience.
[snip]
Rowland McDonnell
> Peter Flynn <peter...@m.silmaril.ie> said:
>
> >> I want to be 100% sure that nothing messes up the things I add. The way
> >> to be sure of that is to define a new texmf tree - one that MacTeX
> >> doesn't know about. Especially with what I've seen i-installer do in
> >> the past... Who knows what might get over-written or deleted or added
> >> where I don't want it and don't know about it?
> >
> > You worry me. I'm considering a new laptop, and thinking now is the time
> > to move to a Mac. But you seem to be implying that MacTeX is unstable
> > with respect to its directory tree usage.
>
> No need to worry, Rowland is talking about some very esoteric stuff no
> one else experienced yet besides him
Actually, that's utter nonsense, that is. This is just defending the
indefensible if you ask me with a dishonest persona attack against me.
The MacTeX mailing list is a very hostile place. Its owner claims to
ban personal attacks, but he encouraged them against /me/ on his mailing
list, and the record proves that he turned internet stalker and pestered
me on this newsgroup when I walked away from his mailing list.
> (and which have been fixed after
> people have finally been able to actually understand what Rowland had
> been doing). Check out the TeX on OSX mailing list if you're interested
> in the details, but I can assure that these are not problems you will
> ever encounter.
[snip]
It's hardly `esoteric' to put local additions in the recommended local
additions directory tree, and I'm far from unique in having problems due
to MacTeX's automated update and install mechanism reading and writing
to that directory, while taking no care to ensure that it didn't wipe
out anything it shouldn't. i-installer has in fact deleted hundreds of
megabytes of data here without any warning at all.
The commonplace problems I ran into back then have been fixed - so I'm
told - but there's no guarantee that similar problems with not recur.
Rowland McDonnell
> Rowland McDonnell wrote:
> [snip]
> > The point is that with (for example) gwteX, the system-wide local
> > additions tree was used for things not installed by the local user,
> > there's no particular reason to think that in future, the provided local
> > additions texmf tree will stay clear of such things in future.
> >
> > I want to be 100% sure that nothing messes up the things I add. The way
> > to be sure of that is to define a new texmf tree - one that MacTeX
> > doesn't know about. Especially with what I've seen i-installer do in
> > the past... Who knows what might get over-written or deleted or added
> > where I don't want it and don't know about it?
>
> You worry me. I'm considering a new laptop, and thinking now is the time
> to move to a Mac. But you seem to be implying that MacTeX is unstable
> with respect to its directory tree usage.
It has demonstrated an absence of any such stability, yes.
The best assurance I've had is the personal faith of some people that
the current Cabal won't do anything bad to the users. Since the MacTeX
developers have done bad things in the past, I'm unconvinced.
> > I've had a lot of very bad experiences and this is a way of avoiding a
> > repeat of some of them.
>
> I used to do this with Unix and DOS/Win implementations until TeX Live
> started to stabilize a bit. Even now it installs itself in a different
> directory every year, as far as I can see.
Ah well now, that sort of thing's not a problem: with current MacTeX,
each new version (one per year, probably) gets a new directory tree for
that version, so you can't lose last year's stuff.
> > And if anyone's got any news on whether or not printing's ever going to
> > be fixed in TeXShop, I'd love to hear it.]
>
> What is the problem, exactly?
Many, many problems exist with TeXShop - the author failed to reply to
all of my bug reports so I gave up trying to get anything fixed, and
concentrated on workarounds and how to evade TeXShop as much as
possible.
>I don't often generate paper myself, but
> it would occasionally be useful.
The main problem I run in to day to day is that if I've got a pdf file
with two different paper sizes - well, A4 (the letter) and DL (for
printing the envelope), TeXShop is unable to print the DL page actually
on DL paper - it just plain screws up. I'd have to do some tests again
to report the *exact* pathology, but `it just doesn't work'.
Preview does the job without trouble - but it's a minor pain.
Rowland McDonnell
MacTeX works great as installed and I've got no worries about it - it's
just that I think it's worth being a bit cautious about it /in some
ways/.
I won't touch i-installer after my past experiences, for example. When
trying to get i-installer's nasty problems fixed (allegedly, they have
been), I had a lot of hostility from the author who seemed to be annoyed
because I was offering problem reports rather than praise for his
efforts.
(Said author later told me that my input resulted in the biggest set of
improvements to i-installer that he'd implemented up until then - I
explain that point for those who think that I was just hurling unhelpful
abuse at him. I was not: I was explaining about specific technical
problems).
Enrico Gregorio
> Herbert Schulz <he...@wideopenwest.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > MacTeX is very stable with its directory tree usage.
>
> It has not proven so in my experience.
>
> [snip]
I'm tempted to answer with an American idiom which starts with "bu",
but it wouldn't be considered polite.
You can't blame TeX Live (aka as MacTeX on Mac OS X) developers for
what other people did. Unfortunately, Gerben Wierda did some directory
juggling in the past: his distributions were developing, that's all.
I don't know your feelings towards Gerben (better, I know, but heartily
disagree): I think we Mac users should only thank him for his work.
If you are thinking that OzTeX was better under that respect, you are
plainly wrong. It's true that OzTeX didn't need ls-R files, with the
painful effect of dramatically slowing file searches. It's a common
experience among Mac users that compilation under OzTeX was much
slower than under other operating systems.
About MacTeX: it never changed the directory structure, AFAICT. All
problems come from /your/ will to tamper with things that go pretty
well out of the box.
Ciao
Enrico
Peter Flynn
> Many, many problems exist with TeXShop - the author failed to reply to
> all of my bug reports so I gave up trying to get anything fixed, and
> concentrated on workarounds and how to evade TeXShop as much as
> possible.
Some developers treat bug reports as attacks, some don't, just the same
as for commercial software. I long ago gave up filing bug reports on
anything I use, because they were about usability, which is a low
priority for developers, who tend to develop software for other
developers, not for end users. There are many excellent exceptions to
this rule, however, and many of them are in the TeX field, fortunately.
> The main problem I run in to day to day is that if I've got a pdf file
> with two different paper sizes - well, A4 (the letter) and DL (for
> printing the envelope), TeXShop is unable to print the DL page actually
> on DL paper - it just plain screws up. I'd have to do some tests again
> to report the *exact* pathology, but `it just doesn't work'.
But if it's just a PDF surely printing is handled by some system-level
utility like CUPS, not by TeXShop?
> Preview does the job without trouble - but it's a minor pain.
I don't know Preview so I can't comment.
I had a client who needed a long print job in which each customer's
account started with paper from tray 2 (A4 width but 396mm long because
it has a perforated cheque attached) but continuation pages were A4 from
tray 1. PDF at the time appeared incapable of this, whereas stuffing the
tray-change codes into the PS output worked fine.
///Peter
Oscar A. Moreno
Regards,
On 5/11/08 07:38 AM, in article
1igrzza.iivphzjt6nj3N%real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet, "Rowland
Simon Spiegel
(Rowland McDonnell) said:
> Simon Spiegel <si...@simifilm.ch> wrote:
>
>> Peter Flynn <peter...@m.silmaril.ie> said:
>>
>>>> I want to be 100% sure that nothing messes up the things I add. The way
>>>> to be sure of that is to define a new texmf tree - one that MacTeX
>>>> doesn't know about. Especially with what I've seen i-installer do in
>>>> the past... Who knows what might get over-written or deleted or added
>>>> where I don't want it and don't know about it?
>>>
>>> You worry me. I'm considering a new laptop, and thinking now is the time
>>> to move to a Mac. But you seem to be implying that MacTeX is unstable
>>> with respect to its directory tree usage.
>>
>> No need to worry, Rowland is talking about some very esoteric stuff no
>> one else experienced yet besides him
>
> Actually, that's utter nonsense, that is. This is just defending the
> indefensible if you ask me with a dishonest persona attack against me.
I'm not going to argue with you since you've proven regularly that
you're completely incapable of anything even remotely ressembling a
normal discussion. Fact is that no one, neither on the OSX TeX mailing
list nor on this newesgroup has ever experienced the problems you have.
>
> The MacTeX mailing list is a very hostile place.
It's only as long as you are around.
simon
Rowland McDonnell
> So, what distribution of TeX in the Mac do you use?
MacTeX, obviously. It's the least unusable of a bad bunch and MacTeX
2007 is a vastly better than MacTeX 2006.
And if you eschew i-installer (previously one could not do this
practically speaking), most of the risks evaporate.
Rowland McDonnell
> Rowland McDonnell wrote:
> > Many, many problems exist with TeXShop - the author failed to reply to
> > all of my bug reports so I gave up trying to get anything fixed, and
> > concentrated on workarounds and how to evade TeXShop as much as
> > possible.
>
> Some developers treat bug reports as attacks,
???
That's really, really strange and not a thought that had occurred to me
before.
>some don't, just the same
> as for commercial software.
I didn't know that people could take bug reports as attacks. How does
that work - I assume it's some sort of psychological problem?
>I long ago gave up filing bug reports on
> anything I use, because they were about usability, which is a low
> priority for developers, who tend to develop software for other
> developers, not for end users. There are many excellent exceptions to
> this rule, however, and many of them are in the TeX field, fortunately.
I gave up on usability suggestions in most cases a very long time ago -
but these were `it's broken, not functioning to spec' type bug reports.
> > The main problem I run in to day to day is that if I've got a pdf file
> > with two different paper sizes - well, A4 (the letter) and DL (for
> > printing the envelope), TeXShop is unable to print the DL page actually
> > on DL paper - it just plain screws up. I'd have to do some tests again
> > to report the *exact* pathology, but `it just doesn't work'.
>
> But if it's just a PDF surely printing is handled by some system-level
> utility like CUPS, not by TeXShop?
Preview can do it, Acrobat Reader can do it, TeXShop can't[1].
Ladeez and gennlemen, place your bets!
> > Preview does the job without trouble - but it's a minor pain.
>
> I don't know Preview so I can't comment.
>
> I had a client who needed a long print job in which each customer's
> account started with paper from tray 2 (A4 width but 396mm long because
> it has a perforated cheque attached) but continuation pages were A4 from
> tray 1. PDF at the time appeared incapable of this, whereas stuffing the
> tray-change codes into the PS output worked fine.
I wouldn't know about that sort of thing - I can tell that TeXShop's got
lots of flaws, and that's one of them.
Rowland.
[1] Just tried Acrobat Reader - your point was intriguing, so a further
test was necessary. MacOS X 10.4.11, 4G5.
Rowland McDonnell
> Rowland McDonnell <real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet> wrote:
>
> > Herbert Schulz <he...@wideopenwest.com> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > MacTeX is very stable with its directory tree usage.
> >
> > It has not proven so in my experience.
> >
> > [snip]
>
> I'm tempted to answer with an American idiom which starts with "bu",
> but it wouldn't be considered polite.
<raised eyebrow> I'm used to rudeness, and perfectly capable of being
rude back - more viciously if the rudeness hurled at me is American
(well, the colonials need taking down a peg or three when they get
uppity, yes? And I've got a dialect of English of my own that I feel
needs to be defended against rampant Americanism in any case). Okay,
life's nicer if one isn't rude.
> You can't blame TeX Live (aka as MacTeX on Mac OS X) developers for
> what other people did.
I don't.
>Unfortunately, Gerben Wierda did some directory
> juggling in the past: his distributions were developing, that's all.
> I don't know your feelings towards Gerben
In the context of this discussion, my feelings about Gerben are
completely irrelevant because I'm talking about the behaviour of the
software.
>(better, I know, but heartily
> disagree): I think we Mac users should only thank him for his work.
I don't see why - he did a lot of bad stuff, and I'm not aware that
anything he's done is useful to me.
> If you are thinking that OzTeX was better under that respect, you are
> plainly wrong.
You are plainly wrong to suggest that OzTeX, which had no automated
installation processes at all, was not safer when being maintained than
gwTeX - including as it did i-installer.
OzTeX is *safe* - never wipes out files, and it's easy to add
system-wide extras because of the simple, well documented, easy to find,
config file.
Note: `simple', `well documented' and `easy to find' are not features
that apply to the various config files used by MacTeX's components.
kpsewhich is impossible to use intelligently if you're not `one of those
who know how it all works'. Generally speaking, I can't find what I
need using kpsewhich unless I can get someone to tell me which kpsewhich
incantation is the right one for the file I'm looking for.
Oh god, it's maddening, it really is. kpsewhich just makes no sense to
me at all.
> It's true that OzTeX didn't need ls-R files, with the
> painful effect of dramatically slowing file searches.
I've no idea why you mention this point: it was only a problem with
early versions of OzTeX, and I developed a workaround for that
particular issue that gave me `fast enough LaTeXing' on a 25MHz 68LC040
Mac (Performa 475).
For sure modern TeXs work more quickly, and I don't doubt that more
efficient operation than OzTeX of old is perfectly possible. But
directory index files for fast searching are not something that I've
complained about that I know of - so why bring the matter up?
> It's a common
> experience among Mac users that compilation under OzTeX was much
> slower than under other operating systems.
Indeed - so what?
> About MacTeX: it never changed the directory structure, AFAICT. All
> problems come from /your/ will to tamper with things that go pretty
> well out of the box.
Well, you say `tamper' - I say `add local additions in the standard,
conventional, utterly normal way'. Or even `use i-installer as it was
designed to be used' - as I tried to some years ago, and got bitten very
very badly.
If that counts as `tampering' with the distribution, I think it's pretty
obvious why I say it's a lot worse than OzTeX which did not view `adding
founts, classes, and packages' as being `esoteric' as one poster to this
thread put it.
It's a bit worrying that someone on this newsgroup could refer to what I
do as `esoteric', and probably explains why it's so hard to do normal
things with TeX like set up hyphenation the way the local users need it
to be set up using the standard TeX mechanisms, or add class and package
files in a secure way that is also available system wide, and so on.
All these things were easily done with OzTeX - very easily done because
of its good documentation and very helpful mailing list.
MacTeX - well, it's a whole different culture. You've got to like what
you're given, and be thankful - and if you don't show proper gratitude
to the special people who have created it, you can't expect any help at
all. As for the documentation: it's a sick joke.
Rowland McDonnell
> (Rowland McDonnell) said:
>
> > Simon Spiegel <si...@simifilm.ch> wrote:
> >
> >> Peter Flynn <peter...@m.silmaril.ie> said:
> >>
> >>>> I want to be 100% sure that nothing messes up the things I add. The way
> >>>> to be sure of that is to define a new texmf tree - one that MacTeX
> >>>> doesn't know about. Especially with what I've seen i-installer do in
> >>>> the past... Who knows what might get over-written or deleted or added
> >>>> where I don't want it and don't know about it?
> >>>
> >>> You worry me. I'm considering a new laptop, and thinking now is the time
> >>> to move to a Mac. But you seem to be implying that MacTeX is unstable
> >>> with respect to its directory tree usage.
> >>
> >> No need to worry, Rowland is talking about some very esoteric stuff no
> >> one else experienced yet besides him
> >
> > Actually, that's utter nonsense, that is. This is just defending the
> > indefensible if you ask me with a dishonest persona attack against me.
>
> I'm not going to argue with you since you've proven regularly that
> you're completely incapable of anything even remotely ressembling a
> normal discussion.
Since when was personal abuse on topic for this newsgroup, eh?
However:
Absolutely right - whatever you say, oh my lord and master and One True
Reliable Judge of All.
Tell me, why do you hurl this personal abuse around the place?
Especially since it's been proven regularly that I'm very good at
engaging in technical discussions.
It's why Andrew Treverrow put my name in the `Thanks' section of OzTeX -
I asked him why, and he explained that it was because I'd been so
helpful for so many years on the OzTeX mailing list.
It's also been proven that I'm a *SUPERB* one-to-one teacher - something
I'd be completely incapable of if your claim about me were true, so I
think it's proven beyond all doubt (reasonable or otherwise) that your
judgement on me is utter nonsense based on nothing more than your
misperceptions and malice.
But of course you will deny all that because you just know I'm a total
shit, don't you? And what you know must be true, mustn't it?
Regardless of any evidence to the contrary. Never mind the fact that
I've taken part in lots of mailing lists and only been subjected to the
sort of hostility I've met on the MacTeX mailing list in two forums:
once on the MacTeX mailing list, and another time on a mailing list for
mentally ill people.
In other words, the reason I've had trouble with the MacTeX mailing list
is that the people there behave like a bunch of loonies[1].
You might like to know that you've earned yourself an entry on my list
of `complete bastards to avoid like the plague'.
> Fact is that no one, neither on the OSX TeX mailing
> list nor on this newesgroup has ever experienced the problems you have.
Fact is, the owner of the MacTeX mailing list followed me here to hurl
personal abuse at me.
Fact is, plenty of others have given up on the MacTeX mailing list in
disgust for the same reasons as me.
Fact is, your claims are false.
> > The MacTeX mailing list is a very hostile place.
>
> It's only as long as you are around.
So you say - but in making that claim, you are demonstrating a minor
aspect of the hostility that I'm complaining about.
I've come across plenty of others who have given up on the MacTeX
maliing list because it's a very unhelpful, hostile forum.
But of course you just know that can't be true, don't you? Never mind -
you carry on living in your version of Cloud Cuckoo Land. Just don't
expect me to believe a word you come out with.
Rowland.
[1] Don't even think about giving me shit for `politically incorrect'
terminology: I'm officially mentally ill myself, and I've no trouble
with people calling me a loony.
Juergen Fenn
Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
> It's a bit worrying that someone on this newsgroup could refer to what I
> do as `esoteric', and probably explains why it's so hard to do normal
> things with TeX like set up hyphenation the way the local users need it
> to be set up using the standard TeX mechanisms, or add class and package
> files in a secure way that is also available system wide, and so on.
>
> All these things were easily done with OzTeX - very easily done because
> of its good documentation and very helpful mailing list.
>
> MacTeX - well, it's a whole different culture. You've got to like what
> you're given, and be thankful - and if you don't show proper gratitude
> to the special people who have created it, you can't expect any help at
> all. As for the documentation: it's a sick joke.
I beg your pardon, maybe I am not aware of what teXing used to be like
on a Mac because I have only recently switched from Windows, but to tell
you the truth I cannot tell any difference between MacTeX and any other
TeX distribution I worked with before. I just about works. So what
exactly is it that you are missing or that you think is wrong or that
should be changed with MacTeX?
Jürgen.
Simon Spiegel
>
> So you say - but in making that claim, you are demonstrating a minor
> aspect of the hostility that I'm complaining about.
>
> I've come across plenty of others who have given up on the MacTeX
> maliing list because it's a very unhelpful, hostile forum.
>
> But of course you just know that can't be true, don't you? Never mind -
> you carry on living in your version of Cloud Cuckoo Land. Just don't
> expect me to believe a word you come out with.
>
> Rowland.
>
> [1] Don't even think about giving me shit for `politically incorrect'
> terminology: I'm officially mentally ill myself, and I've no trouble
> with people calling me a loony.
As I said, I'm not going to argue with you anymore. Anyone who doubts
that you are completely uncapabale of a proper discussion can easily
verify it by googling your name either in this or other newsgroups.
There are a myriads of threads where you've proven your incapability of
leading a normal discussion. I'm aware that you probably suffer from
some serious mental illness, and I do realize that you are very tragic
human being; unfortunately, knowing this doesn't make discussions with
you more pleasant or useful, so I wont do it anymore. I will just react
in cases like this where there is danger that people may actually
believe your crazy ramblings.
To make it short: MacTeX is perfectly safe and usuable as long as one
is not Rowland.
simon
Enrico Gregorio
> OzTeX is *safe* - never wipes out files, and it's easy to add
> system-wide extras because of the simple, well documented, easy to find,
> config file.
Really? I don't remember this feature. Indeed it was a pain every time
a major update was issued.
> Note: `simple', `well documented' and `easy to find' are not features
> that apply to the various config files used by MacTeX's components.
Really? Swimming across the odd syntax of the preference file was an
easy task?
> kpsewhich is impossible to use intelligently if you're not `one of those
> who know how it all works'. Generally speaking, I can't find what I
> need using kpsewhich unless I can get someone to tell me which kpsewhich
> incantation is the right one for the file I'm looking for.
>
> Oh god, it's maddening, it really is. kpsewhich just makes no sense to
> me at all.
That's obviously /your/ problem.
> > It's true that OzTeX didn't need ls-R files, with the
> > painful effect of dramatically slowing file searches.
>
> I've no idea why you mention this point: it was only a problem with
> early versions of OzTeX, and I developed a workaround for that
> particular issue that gave me `fast enough LaTeXing' on a 25MHz 68LC040
> Mac (Performa 475).
I don't want to blame Andrew Trevorrow, who did an egregious work
during the years. I just observed that when OzTeX was almost the only
TeX distribution on the Mac OS platform (I don't consider Textures,
which was fast but had a number of problems to be really called TeX)
it was way slower than any implementation on any other platform.
But my final point is: why don't you stick with OzTeX? It still
works well on Mac OS X and it can be linked to the directory structure
of any TeX distribution. If you list carefully /each/ of the directories
in strict order of preference, I mean.
You probably are the only LaTeX user who doesn't want to employ babel;
OTOH, it's pretty easy to create a format where UK English hyphenation
is the default, without any problem with respect to future versions of
the distribution. /You/ are not able to do that, though many people have
tried to help you: that qualifies you as a "somaro" [1]. So, I guess
I'll be put in the black list of yours; shrug.
[1] Italian way to call a not very bright student.
Ciao
Enrico
Juergen Fenn
Enrico Gregorio schrieb:
> But my final point is: why don't you stick with OzTeX?
That's what I wonder, too. Although it has only rarely been mentioned in
the ressources for TeX on the Mac, OzTeX ist still available for a small
fee from <http://www.trevorrow.com/oztex/>, and some TeX users groups
offer OzTeX for free for their members.
Jürgen.
Peter Flynn
[me]
>> Some developers treat bug reports as attacks,
>
> before.
>
>> some don't, just the same as for commercial software.
>
> I didn't know that people could take bug reports as attacks. How does
> that work - I assume it's some sort of psychological problem?
I remember suggesting some harmless improvement to LISTSERV to Eric
Thomas once, and I was actually frightened at the reaction I got. And
Eric is definitely one of The Good Guys. I suggested adding a "redirect"
function to MozMail, and the proposal is still bouncing around the
Thunderbird bugzilla unresolved because of the violence of the reaction.
It's defensive: when a highly-skilled programmer produces what s/he
considers to be a good program, it's hard or them suddenly to roll over
and accept people criticize it. But it's declining. Cast your mind back.
[me]
>> But if it's just a PDF surely printing is handled by some system-level
>> utility like CUPS, not by TeXShop?
>
> Preview can do it, Acrobat Reader can do it, TeXShop can't[1].
Weird. I would have assumed that a generated PDf containing the right
instructions would simply have been submitted to the print spooler
untouched, instead of being pre-interpreted. But I'm simple like that.
///Peter
Simon Spiegel
> Rowland McDonnell wrote:
>> Many, many problems exist with TeXShop - the author failed to reply to
>> all of my bug reports so I gave up trying to get anything fixed, and
>> concentrated on workarounds and how to evade TeXShop as much as
>> possible.
>
> Some developers treat bug reports as attacks, some don't, just the same
> as for commercial software.
And some users actually phrase bug reports like attacks ...
>
> But if it's just a PDF surely printing is handled by some system-level
> utility like CUPS, not by TeXShop?
Absolutely.
simon
Rowland McDonnell
> Peter Flynn <peter...@m.silmaril.ie> said:
>
> > Rowland McDonnell wrote:
> >> Many, many problems exist with TeXShop - the author failed to reply to
> >> all of my bug reports so I gave up trying to get anything fixed, and
> >> concentrated on workarounds and how to evade TeXShop as much as
> >> possible.
> >
> > Some developers treat bug reports as attacks, some don't, just the same
> > as for commercial software.
>
> And some users actually phrase bug reports like attacks ...
[snip]
Or so people say, which is apparantly the excuse for them hurling
personal abuse on technical forums.
It is of course not beyond the limits of probability that the problem
here is more the warped perceptions of those reading the bug reports
that turns them inside their twisted, perverted minds into personal
attacks when in fact they're no such thing.
But of course that sort of person will never admit that their own
perceptions are not 100% reliable in an absolute sense, will they?
Apparently, according to that sort of person, it's perfectly okay to
launch personal insults into cyberspace (even in technical discussion
forums like this one) if one can get a large enough group of people to
agree that the person receiving these new insults has himself behaved in
an insulting fashion in the past.
To me, that sounds like the excuse for all the running feuds ever - and
as moronically invalid as the rest. But it seemed to be the reason why
the owner of the TeX on MacOS X mailing list turned cyberstalker and
came to this newsgroup to insult me.
I think the reason he did that is that he hated me for telling him that
I found comp.text.tex a lot more useful than his mailing list -
something about not getting quite so much personal abuse here, and
getting a lot more helpful advice.
I told him to go away and leave me alone. He did. Why don't you follow
his lead and stop showing yourself up here?
Rowland McDonnell
> Rowland McDonnell wrote:
> [me]
> >> Some developers treat bug reports as attacks,
> >
> > That's really, really strange and not a thought that had occurred to me
> > before.
> >
> >> some don't, just the same as for commercial software.
> >
> > I didn't know that people could take bug reports as attacks. How does
> > that work - I assume it's some sort of psychological problem?
>
> I remember suggesting some harmless improvement to LISTSERV to Eric
> Thomas once, and I was actually frightened at the reaction I got. And
> Eric is definitely one of The Good Guys.
<head spinning slightly> Okay, I think I'm beginning to dig it, man.
> I suggested adding a "redirect"
> function to MozMail, and the proposal is still bouncing around the
> Thunderbird bugzilla unresolved because of the violence of the reaction.
Ye gods.
> It's defensive: when a highly-skilled programmer produces what s/he
> considers to be a good program, it's hard or them suddenly to roll over
> and accept people criticize it.
That way of looking at things seems rather insane to me. Surely if a
programmer wishes to produce the best optimised program, then they must
operate a negative feedback loop as with anything else? That is, find
out what's wrong or what could be better, find out how to make it so,
and then do it?
If you're *genuinely* highly skilled, that's what you do - those who
don't are idiots in my book.
> But it's declining. Cast your mind back.
I always used to be able to offer suggestions to people about software
without them getting angry.
> [me]
> >> But if it's just a PDF surely printing is handled by some system-level
> >> utility like CUPS, not by TeXShop?
> >
> > Preview can do it, Acrobat Reader can do it, TeXShop can't[1].
>
> Weird. I would have assumed that a generated PDf containing the right
> instructions would simply have been submitted to the print spooler
> untouched, instead of being pre-interpreted. But I'm simple like that.
Things on Macs are often not as straightforward as one might think. I
tend not to try to predict how it's being done, but to measure what I
can about what's happening. And then I whip out the dead chicken and
get on with the voodoo rites...
Rowland.
Rowland McDonnell
> Enrico Gregorio schrieb:
>
> > But my final point is: why don't you stick with OzTeX?
>
> That's what I wonder, too.
Because it'd be very much harder to set up OzTeX to do what I want to be
able to do with the stuff that's become available to us Mac users since
MacOS X came along.
I wonder why so many people here feel the need to spend so much time
criticising me and suggesting I should do things that are pointless and
stupid.
This is after all supposed to be a technical newsgroup, isn't it?
> Although it has only rarely been mentioned in
> the ressources for TeX on the Mac, OzTeX ist still available for a small
> fee from <http://www.trevorrow.com/oztex/>, and some TeX users groups
> offer OzTeX for free for their members.
I paid for OzTeX many years ago.
Rowland McDonnell
The two main problems I had with MacTeX were this:
Firstly, it comes with Babel as a standard fixture. I could find no way
to set up Babel to default to my local hyphenation patterns (UK English)
rather than the standard US English.
So I decided I wanted to set up MacTeX so I could use formats without
Babel installed, for that reason and also because it would probably help
improve compatibility with my old documents, given that all the TeX
distributions I'd previously used had not included Babel (I started
using LaTeX in about 1988/89 ish, well before Babel was written).
That turned out to be non-trivial to arrange - even though that sort of
thing was very easy to do with OzTeX due to a much more straightforward
config file arrangement and better documentation, and fairly easy to do
with CMacTeX (which has more of a TDS influence on it).
And secondly, I wanted to add a system-wide local texmf tree. With
MacTeX 2006, the official system-wide local additions texmf tree was not
kept free for the local maintainer, but was used by MacTeX. In
particular, it was used by i-installer.
Because I had had problems with i-installer deleting data without
warning, I did not want my local additions to share directory tree space
with anything i-installer knew about, so decided to add a system-wide
local additions texmf tree - which also turned out to be rather
non-trivial to do.
Anyway, it seems that with MacTeX, there is no guarantee that the
official system wide local additions texmf tree would be a safe place to
put data, so I had to figure out how to get the job done. The
documentation supplied does not make this job at all easy. I had to get
advice on how to do it. One problem was that the users of the TeX on
MacOS X mailing list didn't want to let me know how to do it. I did
find out eventually, but it seems only one person knew what I needed
(Gerben Wierda, the man behind gwTeX, the heart of MacTeX 2006) and he
refused to tell me until I'd been quite rude to him - which I thought
was very strange on his part.
I don't *know* what persuaded Gerben to give me the single line edit
information I needed, but I do know that he refused to give me any
useful information on the subject in hand until I had made criticisms of
him. <shrug> I know the Dutch are stereotypically supposed to be
stubborn, awkward bastards, but I didn't expect the stereotype to turn
out to be true.
A minor problem is that TeXShop, the main shell for using MacTeX, has a
lot of bugs - functional bugs, not `problems in usage that need sorting
to make life easier' but `things that just don't function correctly'.
I reported some of them to the author of TeXShop. He ignored every one
of my bug reports, so I still have to use Preview for a lot of printing.
It's a very different culture to the one I knew on the OzTeX mailing
list, I can tell you.
Rowland McDonnell
> Rowland McDonnell <real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet> wrote:
>
> > OzTeX is *safe* - never wipes out files, and it's easy to add
> > system-wide extras because of the simple, well documented, easy to find,
> > config file.
>
> Really? I don't remember this feature. Indeed it was a pain every time
> a major update was issued.
I must say that I always found it more straightforward to migrate to a
new version of OzTeX, when compared to new versions of all other
versions of TeX that I have maintained.
> > Note: `simple', `well documented' and `easy to find' are not features
> > that apply to the various config files used by MacTeX's components.
>
> Really? Swimming across the odd syntax of the preference file was an
> easy task?
<puzzled> But there was nothing odd about it: it was very clear, very
logical, and very well documented.
By which I conclude that when you call it `odd', what you really mean is
`unfamiliar to Enrico Gregorio, who has trouble with reading
documentation'.
For myself, I don't care what you are familiar with: I read the
documentation, and found that it was all very clear and straightforward
unlike the mess that is the norm in the `world based on TeX Live'. That
really *IS* filled with odd syntax and horrible complexity that's nearly
impossible to work out.
The reason it's impossible to work out is the appalling quality of
available documentation and the appalling attitude of the people who
know the answers.
> > kpsewhich is impossible to use intelligently if you're not `one of those
> > who know how it all works'. Generally speaking, I can't find what I
> > need using kpsewhich unless I can get someone to tell me which kpsewhich
> > incantation is the right one for the file I'm looking for.
> >
> > Oh god, it's maddening, it really is. kpsewhich just makes no sense to
> > me at all.
>
> That's obviously /your/ problem.
Of course it's my bloody problem - I've got to work with the badly
documented pile of crap. Why else did you think I mentioned it?
> > > It's true that OzTeX didn't need ls-R files, with the
> > > painful effect of dramatically slowing file searches.
> >
> > I've no idea why you mention this point: it was only a problem with
> > early versions of OzTeX, and I developed a workaround for that
> > particular issue that gave me `fast enough LaTeXing' on a 25MHz 68LC040
> > Mac (Performa 475).
>
> I don't want to blame Andrew Trevorrow, who did an egregious work
> during the years. I just observed that when OzTeX was almost the only
> TeX distribution on the Mac OS platform (I don't consider Textures,
> which was fast but had a number of problems to be really called TeX)
> it was way slower than any implementation on any other platform.
It got quicker - the sluggishness you refer to got clobbered at some
point. OzTeX 3, IIRC.
But I really don't see what this has to do with the setting up and
maintenence of MacTeX 2006 and MacTeX 2007.
It seems to me that you're just wanting to hurl some mud at OzTeX -
well, that's not what this newsgroup's for.
> But my final point is: why don't you stick with OzTeX? It still
> works well on Mac OS X and it can be linked to the directory structure
> of any TeX distribution. If you list carefully /each/ of the directories
> in strict order of preference, I mean.
<very puzzled> And how exactly would that do anything but make
everything much more complicated and harder to set up?
I mean, the problem with your suggestion is that it's impossible to
`list each of the directories in strict order of preference' (not that
one needs to do that - your suggestion is in fact insane) because it's
impossible to find out what each of the directories supplied with a
modern TeX distribution is for, at least from the point of any normal
person.
I noticed this with CMacTeX, which was based on the same sort of stuff
as TeXLive. OzTeX was always coherent; CMacTeX less so. MacTeX less
still.
> You probably are the only LaTeX user who doesn't want to employ babel;
You are certainly wrong, since Babel increases the memory usage of TeX
and most people have no need for it, since it's only needed for
multi-lingual typesetting[1]. This means that the users of low-capacity
computers have a practical use for unplugging Babel. There are any
number of older TeX distributions which did not have Babel by default.
and it takes up capacity.
And don't forget that until MacTeX, the standard Mac TeXs did not come
with Babel by default.
You are trying to suggest that I'm behaving really strangely and oddly
when in fact I'm just wanted to carry on using LaTeX in the utterly
totally normal conventional way that I have been doing for about two
decades now.
It seems to me that your only conceivable motivation in suggesting that
I'm the only person using LaTeX without Babel is to - well, you're doing
a job of character assassination, aren't you? And that's really rather
off topic on this newsgroup, isn't it?
How about you put your personal insults about me in private emails to
me, and stop annoying the readers of this very useful technical
newsgroup with personal abuse?
> OTOH, it's pretty easy to create a format where UK English hyphenation
> is the default, without any problem with respect to future versions of
> the distribution.
I failed to find the method in the documentation.
No-one has offered me any pointers on where I might find the method, nor
has anyone told me what the method might be.
Would you be so kind as to provide me with a pointer, or are you just
enjoying standing back and sneering at me in mockery?
> /You/ are not able to do that, though many people have
> tried to help you:
But not one person has offered me any assistance in sorting out how to
get UK English as the default language in Babel. Not one.
So I must ask you: why did you make this false claim?
>that qualifies you as a "somaro" [1]. So, I guess
> I'll be put in the black list of yours; shrug.
>
> [1] Italian way to call a not very bright student.
<shrug>
You seem to have qualified yourself as `a total wanker' - a fairly rude
English way to refer to someone you wish to insult; in this case I
picked it as the ideal phrase to direct at a person who's been making up
his mind in contradiction of the evidence.
Rowland.
[1] I'll admit that it's convenient to be able to use a pre-packaged
translation of LaTeX to <mylingo>, but if you're using a 1MB machine,
you might take the trouble to do it the hard way. English monoglots
like me don't need to bother - there are quite a few of us, you know.
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
> As I said, I'm not going to argue with you anymore. Anyone who doubts
> that you are completely uncapabale of a proper discussion can easily
> verify it by googling your name either in this or other newsgroups.
> There are a myriads of threads where you've proven your incapability of
> leading a normal discussion.
Absolutely - the sighting of a single white swan proves that black swans
cannot exist.
And any black swan that exists in a world where white swans can be seen
is a figment of the imagination.[1]
Your command of logic is masterly; however, I suggest that you take your
personal comments about me elsewhere, since they are entirely off topic
in this technical newsgroup.
Perhaps you'd like to email me your concerns about my personality and
behaviour? That way, you'd not be making a damned nuisance of yourself
in this technical newsgroup.
[snip]
Rowland.
[1] For those who might be hard of thinking:
White swan: `me ranting and raving'
Black swan: `me engaging in a civilised discussion'
Simon Spiegel
(Rowland McDonnell) said:
> Simon Spiegel <si...@simifilm.ch> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> As I said, I'm not going to argue with you anymore. Anyone who doubts
>> that you are completely uncapabale of a proper discussion can easily
>> verify it by googling your name either in this or other newsgroups.
>> There are a myriads of threads where you've proven your incapability of
>> leading a normal discussion.
>
> Absolutely - the sighting of a single white swan proves that black swans
> cannot exist.
>
> And any black swan that exists in a world where white swans can be seen
> is a figment of the imagination.[1]
>
> Your command of logic is masterly; however, I suggest that you take your
> personal comments about me elsewhere, since they are entirely off topic
> in this technical newsgroup.
It's a question of basic statistics. It's an empirical fact everyone
can verify that a thread in which you engage has a very high
probability in turning into pointless flamewar and in people giving up
unnerved.
simon
Simon Spiegel
(Rowland McDonnell) said:
>
> Anyway, it seems that with MacTeX, there is no guarantee that the
> official system wide local additions texmf tree would be a safe place to
> put data, so I had to figure out how to get the job done. The
> documentation supplied does not make this job at all easy. I had to get
> advice on how to do it. One problem was that the users of the TeX on
> MacOS X mailing list didn't want to let me know how to do it. I did
> find out eventually, but it seems only one person knew what I needed
> (Gerben Wierda, the man behind gwTeX, the heart of MacTeX 2006) and he
> refused to tell me until I'd been quite rude to him - which I thought
> was very strange on his part.
Yeah, it was plot, a conspiracy, everyone against poor Rowland. We
actually set up a secret second mailing list just to coordinate the
conspiracy.
Aw, now I said too much. Now, they will be after me as well ...
simon
Juergen Fenn
Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
> The two main problems I had with MacTeX were this:
>
> Firstly, it comes with Babel as a standard fixture. I could find no way
> to set up Babel to default to my local hyphenation patterns (UK English)
> rather than the standard US English.
I am sorry, but I cannot follow you on this point because the babel
package in MacTeX is exactly the same as with other TeX distributions i
worked with before. There is only one babel, after all...
> And secondly, I wanted to add a system-wide local texmf tree. With
> MacTeX 2006, the official system-wide local additions texmf tree was not
> kept free for the local maintainer, but was used by MacTeX. In
> particular, it was used by i-installer.
>
> Because I had had problems with i-installer deleting data without
> warning, I did not want my local additions to share directory tree space
> with anything i-installer knew about, so decided to add a system-wide
> local additions texmf tree - which also turned out to be rather
> non-trivial to do.
>
> Anyway, it seems that with MacTeX, there is no guarantee that the
> official system wide local additions texmf tree would be a safe place to
> put data, so I had to figure out how to get the job done.
I think I know what you mean. I didn't like MiKTeX's mpm deleting data,
either. When updating a package with mpm, there was no backup of the old
files. So if something didn't work after updating there was no chance to
go back in time to the old installation unless you had a historic CTAN
repository on an old CD/DVD...
But you /have/ noticed that something has changed from MacTeX 2006 to
the 2007 version, and the FAQ at <http://tug.org/mactex/faq/> answers
all questions on how to install a local texmf tree in MacTeX. You also
find sufficient advice on the DVD itself.
So, after all I don't see a reason to complain about the MacTeX team
here either. In fact, they are doing a rather good job, so good indeed
that I as a complete Macintosh novice had no problem whatsoever
installing TeX on my new Mac back last year which makes me quite
grateful towards the MacTeX team indeed.
Jürgen.
Rowland McDonnell
> Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
>
> > The two main problems I had with MacTeX were this:
> >
> > Firstly, it comes with Babel as a standard fixture. I could find no way
> > to set up Babel to default to my local hyphenation patterns (UK English)
> > rather than the standard US English.
>
> I am sorry, but I cannot follow you on this point because the babel
> package in MacTeX is exactly the same as with other TeX distributions i
> worked with before. There is only one babel, after all...
There is only one LaTeX, after all, and Babel is not part of it...
Babel is an optional extra that can be added to LaTeX if you so wish,
which happens to be included in many TeX distributions pre-configured
for use (possibly only when you've compiled everything and built your
formats (or whatever)).
But Babel was not a part of any of the LaTeX distributions I had used
previously - or if it had been a part of CMacTeX, I removed it so easily
that I don't recall doing so. Babel did not exist when I started using
LaTeX so there's nothing weird about me not using Babel.
> > And secondly, I wanted to add a system-wide local texmf tree. With
> > MacTeX 2006, the official system-wide local additions texmf tree was not
> > kept free for the local maintainer, but was used by MacTeX. In
> > particular, it was used by i-installer.
> >
> > Because I had had problems with i-installer deleting data without
> > warning, I did not want my local additions to share directory tree space
> > with anything i-installer knew about, so decided to add a system-wide
> > local additions texmf tree - which also turned out to be rather
> > non-trivial to do.
> >
> > Anyway, it seems that with MacTeX, there is no guarantee that the
> > official system wide local additions texmf tree would be a safe place to
> > put data, so I had to figure out how to get the job done.
>
> I think I know what you mean. I didn't like MiKTeX's mpm deleting data,
> either. When updating a package with mpm, there was no backup of the old
> files.
i-installer did worse than that, much worse - it even deleted data
before I tried to use i-installer for installing anything. Crazy
software with really, really, /really/ bad documentation.
I mean, why give users a seriously powerful installer that permits one
to configure things before installation, require them to configure the
installation themselves, and then provide no information at all on how
to perform the configuration? Not even any information on where to look
to find out how to perform the configuration? Well, not aside from the
suggestion that you should want to learn all about the insides of TeX
live - which does to me rather defeat the point of a simple, powerful
installer.
`Trust me, I'm an installer' was the idea - except it wasn't usable as
far as I could tell, and it wasn't safe.
I did find out later from Gerben that my emails to him caused him to
make what he considers the most profound and useful set of improvements
he's made so far to i-installer.
I mention that for those who think that my comments are meant to be
personal criticism or personal abuse: they are not. I stick to the
problem - if people get upset, that's their fault; Gerben told me that
he found that my remarks were very useful for informing the future
development of his software (I should mention that we seem to have
identical opinions of the other: `awkward bastard').
I am told that almost all the things I whined about have been fixed.
So maybe I should look at i-installer again - but I haven't done so.
Once bitten, twice shy. And it bit me more than once.
> So if something didn't work after updating there was no chance to
> go back in time to the old installation unless you had a historic CTAN
> repository on an old CD/DVD...
Aye.
> But you /have/ noticed that something has changed from MacTeX 2006 to
> the 2007 version,
Indeed - but I can't be /sure/ that things will remain stable.
On the other hand, there's support for multiple years' MacTeX
installations all kept in separate directory trees which does make most
of my objections about lack of stability a bit obsolete in a way.
That sort of thing (and others) is why I said things were much better
with MacTeX 2007 in my posts to this newsgroup - as you'd know if you'd
taken the care to read them. But the documentation still needs sorting
out.
It seems to me that what you're doing is defending the MacTeX
maintainers against personal attacks that I've not made against them.
Can you explain why?
> and the FAQ at <http://tug.org/mactex/faq/> answers
> all questions on how to install a local texmf tree in MacTeX.
But that FAQ does no such thing: it certainly does nothing to answer my
questions as you would know if you had read my posts to this thread.
> You also
> find sufficient advice on the DVD itself.
Again, that is incorrect. I did eventually get the answers I needed
from the TeX on MacOS X mailing list, and I posted the distillation of
what I have learnt on the subject to this newsgroup: my installation
instructions for myself.
None of the instructions I wrote for myself on how to install MacTeX and
set it up to work the way I like - none of those instructions can
readily be divined from the supplied documentation. My instructions
were winkled out of the TeX on MacOS X mailing list one item at time,
slowly and painfully. I had to do it that way because there isn't any
other way to get the information that I needed and because the TeX on
MacOS X mailing list people are not kind to strangers in my experience
(c.f., Simon Spiegel and the TeX on MacOS X mailing list maintainer
himself coming here as internet stalkers to throw personal abuse at me -
at least the ToMOXml maintainer left immediately, which is why I'm not
typing his name).
The information is most certainly not included in the supplied
documentation as you claim. And yes I have just checked the pointers
you provided in case it's changed since last I looked.
The really big problem was that many of the TeX on MacOS X mailing list
participants don't like telling people how to do things: many of them
(e.g., Simon Spiegel, posting in this thread) would much rather stand
back and hurl personal abuse, I've found. But not all - for example:
----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Maarten Sneep% <maarte...@NOTREAL.nl>
(observe: a nice, helpful Dutchman)
On line 114 of \url{/usr/local/texlive/2007/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf} the
TEXMF
variable is set:
\begin{verbatim}
TEXMF = {$TEXMFCONFIG,$TEXMFVAR,$TEXMFHOME,!!$TEXMFSYSCONFIG,!!
$TEXMFSYSVAR,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFDIST}
\end{verbatim}
Add your tree before that line, thus:
\begin{verbatim}
TEXMFRM = /Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm
\end{verbatim}
and modify line 114 to
\begin{verbatim}
TEXMF = {$TEXMFCONFIG,$TEXMFVAR,$TEXMFHOME,$TEXMFRM,!!
$TEXMFSYSCONFIG,!!$TEXMFSYSVAR,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFDIST}
\end{verbatim}
MS:
I don't think you'll need to modify SYSTEXMF. This tree is used for
generated fonts, and the default will be just fine. Besides you'll
need to make sure that some permissions are set correctly if a tree is
going to be suitable for this type of use. At least that is how I read
the comments.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Which was exactly what I needed to know to do what I needed to do - and
one day, I'll understand it properly too.
> So, after all I don't see a reason to complain about the MacTeX team
> here either.
<baffled> So don't complain about them. Why mention that? I don't see
any reason to complain about them either. What they've done is
imperfect and needs to be improved as with all human endeavour - but
that's no grounds for complaint.
> In fact, they are doing a rather good job, so good indeed
> that I as a complete Macintosh novice had no problem whatsoever
> installing TeX on my new Mac back last year which makes me quite
> grateful towards the MacTeX team indeed.
If you'd read what I'd written, instead of paying attention to what
people have been writing about me, you would know that I consider the
MacTeX installer to do the job it was designed to do perfectly well.
But the documentation is definitely inadequate, in that if you don't
want what MacTeX gives you as standard, it can be hell on Earth sorting
it out.
The problem is that once you start asking how to do things differently,
you get personal abuse. It seems to be an affront to some people to
think that their personally favourite way of working should not be
imposed on everyone, and so dissenters must be cast into the outer
darkness, or something like that anyway[1].
Rowland.
[1] For the hard of thinking[2]: pick up your dictionary, and look up
the words `hyperbole' and `irony'. Also try to divine the meaning of
the phrase `dry humour'.
[2] No I don't mean you, Juergen Fenn.
Rowland McDonnell
A question for you: how come you've done the research on me to be in a
postion to comment on my posts in other newsgroups, as you did in this
thread?
Might it be that that's a sign you're perhaps a teensy bit obsessed with
me? Perhaps - and this is a wild stab in the dark - obsessed with me
because like many unstable characters on the 'net, you've come down with
a desire to commit character assassination on the target of your
obsession? (it's the most common reason for internet stalking that I've
observed)
I do not claim to know your mind: I genuinely have no idea at all what
your motivation might be. I have merely presented a possibility that
occurred to me at random, and I'm wondering if you could help me
understand what you think you're doing.
But whatever your underlying motivation, which I stress I cannot guess
at, you really should stop all these posts you're making about me in
this technical newsgroup.
But back to my curiosity: if I'm wrong about your underlying motivation,
if my idea that you're suffering from typical `internet stalker
obsession with a victim', why *ARE* you so obsessed with me that you
did all that time-consuming minutely-detailed research into my
background? And why did you then spend so much time throwing personal
abuse at me in a technical newsgroup?
And another question: why did you bring up the issue of a conspiracy?
I've not mentioned the idea of a conspiracy.
And to whom do you refer to when you say `we'? I am intrigued, because
I thought I was exchanging comments on a newsgroup with an individual,
but you do appear to be presenting yourself as the representative of a
group. Which group would that be?
Three very simple questions - but I wonder, are you going to provide an
answer? Or is your response going to take the form of more personal
abuse?
Do please let me know - but in private email, so as not to annoy the
decent folk of comp.text.tex who would like this newsgroup to be for
technical discussion, not personal vendettas.
Rowland McDonnell
My god!
So you have spent time analysing all my tens of thousands of Usenet
posts in thousands of threads over the last 20 or so years[1]? You have
read all those threads, analysed their progress, catalogued them
according to type, and done the stats?
Do remind me to run away if you ever get within a hundred yards - you
sound like one of the crazier kinds of stalker.
Since you've done the work (or at least claim to), would you care to
present your results on the Web somewhere for checking? But not on this
newsgroup: it's for technical discussions of comp.text.tex. Most people
aren't as obsessed as you so they won't put the time in analysing my
posts as you have, but since you've apparently done all the hard work
and think it'd be useful for the world to find out how much of an evil
monster I am, how about it?
(I should point out to you that `high probability' is not the same as
the `absolute certainty' which you initially claimed. Was your initial
claim mere hyperbole, or was it an indication of just how extreme is
your obsession with me? I do not claim to know your mind: I ask merely
for information.)
I am rather curious that you don't seem very interested in using this
newsgroup for its intended purpose, and I'm sure that's rather annoying
for many people.
I did previously suggest:
"Perhaps you'd like to email me your concerns about my personality and
behaviour? That way, you'd not be making a damned nuisance of yourself
in this technical newsgroup."
Perhaps there's a bug in your newsreader such that it failed to display
that part of my message?
But to try to keep this on topic, I wonder if you could help me out with
a minor problem? A poster to this newsgroup told me that it's perfectly
possible to set up Babel to default to UK English hyphenation. I've
failed to find the method in the documentation, and have so far been
unable to get anyone provide me with even a pointer to the correct
method.
Could you provide me with this information about LaTeX? A pointer,
maybe, to the relevant documentation?
If you'd rather just carry on posting personal abuse at me, that's okay
with me: I'll carry on gently trying to help you get over your problem
with me.
Rowland.
[1] If so, impressive, because even I couldn't tell you what usernames
I used back in the early days of my Usenet use.
Simon Spiegel
>
> The really big problem was that many of the TeX on MacOS X mailing list
> participants don't like telling people how to do things: many of them
> (e.g., Simon Spiegel, posting in this thread) would much rather stand
> back and hurl personal abuse,
O, the irony ...
simon
Simon Spiegel
(Rowland McDonnell) said:
> Simon Spiegel <si...@remove.simifilm.ch> wrote:
>
>> On 2008-05-13 14:33:25 +0200, real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet
>> (Rowland McDonnell) said:
>>
>>>
>>> Anyway, it seems that with MacTeX, there is no guarantee that the
>>> official system wide local additions texmf tree would be a safe place to
>>> put data, so I had to figure out how to get the job done. The
>>> documentation supplied does not make this job at all easy. I had to get
>>> advice on how to do it. One problem was that the users of the TeX on
>>> MacOS X mailing list didn't want to let me know how to do it. I did
>>> find out eventually, but it seems only one person knew what I needed
>>> (Gerben Wierda, the man behind gwTeX, the heart of MacTeX 2006) and he
>>> refused to tell me until I'd been quite rude to him - which I thought
>>> was very strange on his part.
>>
>> Yeah, it was plot, a conspiracy, everyone against poor Rowland. We
>> actually set up a secret second mailing list just to coordinate the
>> conspiracy.
>>
>> Aw, now I said too much. Now, they will be after me as well ...
>
> A question for you: how come you've done the research on me to be in a
> postion to comment on my posts in other newsgroups, as you did in this
> thread?
>
> Might it be that that's a sign you're perhaps a teensy bit obsessed with
> me?
I'd call it a kind of perverse fascination.
simon
Rowland McDonnell
So, Herr Speigel: would you care to provide some numerical data to back
up your interesting claim that I prefer to hurl personal abuse rather
than providing technical information or otherwise engaging with this
newsgroup in a proper fashion?[1]
I'll admit I've been known to make the odd sharp retort, but I'm hoping
to draw upon your comprehensive statistical database of my collected
Usenet writings for a fully reliable view of the situation.
What fraction of my posts to this newsgroup contain on-topic technical
discussion, and what fraction contain personal abuse? We know you have
a large numerical database collated to analyse my Usenet activity: I'm
sure you can look up the answer and provide it very quickly.
What are the exact figures?
And please, please, please send the data to me via email: this sort of
thing really doesn't belong on comp.text.tex.
Rowland.
[1] I note that you have ignored my questions to you so far[2]. And you
have snipped (without comment) my technical comments and questions about
TeX - completely ignoring all the on-topic parts of my post, in fact. I
find this very strange behaviour on your part - why do you keep trying
to push threads off topic?
[2] Look, I'm pompous, I know it, and I can't help it any more than
Graham Norton can help being camp, all right? It's an affliction.
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
> I'd call it a kind of perverse fascination.
You're obsessed, man. You're compelled to read all my posts and find
some aspect of each one to fashion into a stick with which to beat me.
Who'd do that if they weren't obsessed?
You're a classic internet stalker, you are. Utterly classic and you
don't even seem to be aware of the fact.
Seriously, you've got some problems. I'm mentally ill, I am - and so
are you. Go and see your doctor before it takes over your life even
more. Seriously, Simon - you need help.
Will Robertson
(Rowland McDonnell) said:
> But to try to keep this on topic, I wonder if you could help me out with
> a minor problem? A poster to this newsgroup told me that it's perfectly
> possible to set up Babel to default to UK English hyphenation. I've
> failed to find the method in the documentation, and have so far been
> unable to get anyone provide me with even a pointer to the correct
> method.
I don't know how to do this either. In the defence of the LaTeX
project, I think it's unwise to generate a LaTeX-like format that
typesets documents differently than by default, so I can see why
they're not actively encouraging (e.g. writing documentation) for how
to do this.
The whole "but our sources will compile differently because the
hyphenations will be different" reminds me of this website:
<http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/>
But I do think the argument is much more strong in the case of LaTeX.
So anyway, I looked into how to change the default hyphenation patterns
with babel installed. First I tried `texdoc babel`, but that didn't
seem to help any, since it was assuming that the babel package was
being loaded.
Then I remembered that LaTeX configuration information was documented
in cfgguide and took a look there, but the instructions it gave for
customising the hyphenation didn't mention babel and boiled down to
what you essentially do already (if I recall correctly).
However, it *does* give an example at the very end ("Non-standard
versions") for how to generate your own format based on LaTeX, which
boils down to running
initex \&latex rmlatex
on the file rmlatex.tex consisting of:
\everyjob{\typeout{rmLaTeX 1.0 based on LaTeX2e \fmtversion}}
\RequirePackage[british]{babel}
\dump
And that seems, to me, much easier than "unplugging babel" or whatever it was.
Will
Ulrike Fischer
>> But to try to keep this on topic, I wonder if you could help me out with
>> a minor problem? A poster to this newsgroup told me that it's perfectly
>> possible to set up Babel to default to UK English hyphenation. I've
>> failed to find the method in the documentation, and have so far been
>> unable to get anyone provide me with even a pointer to the correct
>> method.
>
> I don't know how to do this either.
...
> So anyway, I looked into how to change the default hyphenation patterns
> with babel installed. First I tried `texdoc babel`, but that didn't
> seem to help any, since it was assuming that the babel package was
> being loaded.
>
> Then I remembered that LaTeX configuration information was documented
> in cfgguide and took a look there, but the instructions it gave for
> customising the hyphenation didn't mention babel and boiled down to
> what you essentially do already (if I recall correctly).
>
> However, it *does* give an example at the very end ("Non-standard
> versions") for how to generate your own format based on LaTeX, which
> boils down to running
> initex \&latex rmlatex
>
> on the file rmlatex.tex consisting of:
>
> \everyjob{\typeout{rmLaTeX 1.0 based on LaTeX2e \fmtversion}}
> \RequirePackage[british]{babel}
> \dump
>
> And that seems, to me, much easier than "unplugging babel" or whatever it was.
I would simply change the order of the languages in language.dat so that
ukenglish is the first and so the one active when you don't use babel at
all. In miktex you can even do this through the GUI.
It is naturally also possible to write a local hyphen.cfg as -- contrary
to Rolands claim -- LaTeX doesn't "comes with Babel as a standard
fixture". The only thing LaTeX is doing is loading a hyphen.cfg -- and
as user of polyglossia learned -- this don't need to be the one from
babel. It is easy to unplug the babel hyphen.cfg by putting another on
first in the search path (and there are examples for simple alternatives
on CTAN), but I don't see really why this should be done: the hyphen.cfg
of babel has less that 400 lines of code. The strain on the memory are
from the hyphenation patterns, and they are easy to configurate through
the language.dat.
--
Ulrike Fischer
Robin Fairbairns
>Juergen Fenn <jf...@gmx.net> wrote:
>> Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
>> > The two main problems I had with MacTeX were this:
>> >
>> > Firstly, it comes with Babel as a standard fixture. I could find no way
>> > to set up Babel to default to my local hyphenation patterns (UK English)
>> > rather than the standard US English.
>>
>> I am sorry, but I cannot follow you on this point because the babel
>> package in MacTeX is exactly the same as with other TeX distributions i
>> worked with before. There is only one babel, after all...
>
>There is only one LaTeX, after all, and Babel is not part of it...
there is indeed only one latex. however, babel (and a bunch of other
things) is a required part of a latex distribution.
that its list of available languages is integrated into the latex
format is a mere convenience for the majority of people in the world
who don't speak american english.
>Babel is an optional extra that can be added to LaTeX if you so wish,
>which happens to be included in many TeX distributions pre-configured
>for use (possibly only when you've compiled everything and built your
>formats (or whatever)).
>
>But Babel was not a part of any of the LaTeX distributions I had used
>previously - or if it had been a part of CMacTeX, I removed it so easily
>that I don't recall doing so. Babel did not exist when I started using
>LaTeX so there's nothing weird about me not using Babel.
however, there's nothing particularly special about removing babel,
even in a standard distribution that includes it. someone's already
referred you to the configuration guide, which iirc talks about
dealing with language.dat, which is a list of the hyphenation files
that are loaded at latex start-up.
what you want is no less simple than you already did: open
language.dat in a text editor (the simplest will do), comment out all
patterns other than uk-english (ensure that's not commented, of
course). now regenerate all formats (that's texconfig init on a un*x
box, but mactex may behave differently).
as for the local tree stuff (which i don't understand), why don't you
have a single "personal" tree where you put stuff you need to work
with, and soft link every user's personal tree to that?
note: i've never used os/x, hardly ever used a mac at all, so i might
be talking out of line here; but since os/x is a un*x-alike system, i
assume that things like home directories and soft links are there for
ready use.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Enrico Gregorio
Mac OS X /is/ a Un*x system, so soft links are there. But just like any
other distribution, there is the possibility of a "local" tree, the
one where the kpse variable TEXMFLOCAL points to. There is also the
"personal" tree (kpse variable TEXMFHOME), which is, out of the box,
~/Library/texmf
In Mac OS X there is always a "shared" folder available for reading and
writing to all users, so it's fairly simple to create a "pseudolocal"
tree in /Users/Shared/texmf; it's sufficient to create a link
~/Library/texmf -> /Users/Shared/texmf
(~ stands for the home directory of a user) and every user on the system
doing this can employ that tree which doesn't need a ls-R database. Of
course this inhibits the possibility to have a real personal tree, so
the "local" tree method is preferable (it need administrative
privileges, though, and "sudo mktexlsr" after adding anything).
Ciao
Enrico
Rowland McDonnell
> real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet (Rowland McDonnell) writes:
> >Juergen Fenn <jf...@gmx.net> wrote:
> >> Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
> >> > The two main problems I had with MacTeX were this:
> >> >
> >> > Firstly, it comes with Babel as a standard fixture. I could find no way
> >> > to set up Babel to default to my local hyphenation patterns (UK English)
> >> > rather than the standard US English.
> >>
> >> I am sorry, but I cannot follow you on this point because the babel
> >> package in MacTeX is exactly the same as with other TeX distributions i
> >> worked with before. There is only one babel, after all...
> >
> >There is only one LaTeX, after all, and Babel is not part of it...
>
> there is indeed only one latex. however, babel (and a bunch of other
> things) is a required part of a latex distribution.
Really? Well, that's a new one on me. Hmm. Yep, I see that it's now
in the `required' directory on CTAN. Since when has it been there?
> that its list of available languages is integrated into the latex
> format is a mere convenience for the majority of people in the world
> who don't speak american english.
I didn't say it wasn't useful, did I? It's terrifically useful, it's an
essential part of the LaTeX ecology, but it ain't part of LaTeX as such
and I for one don't need it 'cos I'm one of them iggerent English
monoglots.
> >Babel is an optional extra that can be added to LaTeX if you so wish,
> >which happens to be included in many TeX distributions pre-configured
> >for use (possibly only when you've compiled everything and built your
> >formats (or whatever)).
> >
> >But Babel was not a part of any of the LaTeX distributions I had used
> >previously - or if it had been a part of CMacTeX, I removed it so easily
> >that I don't recall doing so. Babel did not exist when I started using
> >LaTeX so there's nothing weird about me not using Babel.
>
> however, there's nothing particularly special about removing babel,
> even in a standard distribution that includes it.
It was quite hard to find out how to do what I wanted to do. I got a
lot of very confusing and unhelpful advice. Admittedly, I think that's
because the underlying TeX distribution is very confusing and hardly
anyone understands it.
> someone's already
> referred you to the configuration guide, which iirc talks about
> dealing with language.dat, which is a list of the hyphenation files
> that are loaded at latex start-up.
What I recall is reading documentatoin that told me very plainly not to
change the default language set in that file. <shrug> So I'm a fool
for reading the manual. I gather I must have read the wrong manual -
I've come across this sort of thing before.
> what you want is no less simple than you already did: open
> language.dat in a text editor (the simplest will do), comment out all
> patterns other than uk-english (ensure that's not commented, of
> course).
The Babel documentation I read indicated that was the wrong thing to do,
which is why I didn't do it and why I tried to find out the correct way
to do it and since I found nothing - well, I stuck with Plan A which was
`carry on with the same unadorned LaTeX I've been using forever'.
<shrug> But if *you* tell me it's the thing to do - well, I had worked
out that I /could/ give myself the default I wanted that way just by
looking at the language.dat files myself in the absence of any other
clues. It was only the documentation telling me to not do it that
stopped me.
But now? - well, it's like this: there are some people I trust when it
comes to LaTeX and allied matters. Why not set things up that way? Why
not indeed.
> now regenerate all formats (that's texconfig init on a un*x
> box, but mactex may behave differently).
Somewhat. The incantation I require - and it took a lot of work to
winkle it out - looks like this:
sudo -sudo -H fmtutil-sys --all --cnffile
/Users/Shared/texmf.rjmm/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
And while there is a man page for fmtutil-sys, there's nothing in the
MacTeX documentation that could help someone work that out - unless
they're already a stone cold Unix expert and Unix TeX expert.
> as for the local tree stuff (which i don't understand), why don't you
> have a single "personal" tree where you put stuff you need to work
> with, and soft link every user's personal tree to that?
The reason I'm not doing something like that is a great deal of
doubtfulness on the part of the TeX on MacOS X mailing list denizens on
how it wasn't likely to work smoothly, as I recall. Unix works with
soft links. The MacOS has had aliases (similar, but different) for a
while. Unix stuff often can't work with aliases; and Mac stuff
apparently often falls over when presented with soft links.
I blame NeXT and the iSteve.
> note: i've never used os/x, hardly ever used a mac at all, so i might
> be talking out of line here; but since os/x is a un*x-alike system, i
> assume that things like home directories and soft links are there for
> ready use.
The Unix side is poorly integrated with the GUI side - and it's /very/
non-Mac. And there's worse. Oh god... I /still/ blame NeXT and the
iSteve.
Rowland.
Rowland McDonnell
> (Rowland McDonnell) said:
>
> > But to try to keep this on topic, I wonder if you could help me out with
> > a minor problem? A poster to this newsgroup told me that it's perfectly
> > possible to set up Babel to default to UK English hyphenation. I've
> > failed to find the method in the documentation, and have so far been
> > unable to get anyone provide me with even a pointer to the correct
> > method.
>
> I don't know how to do this either. In the defence of the LaTeX
> project, I think it's unwise to generate a LaTeX-like format that
> typesets documents differently than by default,
I am generating a standard LaTeX format that typesets documents the same
by default. I'm using \language=0 for US English hyphenation as
demanded by the standard, and setting \language=1 to UK English -
allowed within the standard. And I use \language=1 for my documents by
default.
All standard, according to spec.
So what are you on about?
> so I can see why
> they're not actively encouraging (e.g. writing documentation) for how
> to do this.
Eh? So you think it's unwise to generate a LaTeX format that uses the
standard LaTeX mechanism for providing more than one language's worth of
hyphenation patterns in the format, doing it the standard way to ensure
that the standard US English hyphenation patterns are installed as
\language=0 as demanded by the standard?
I don't see a problem with that at all - all you have to do if you
demand US English hyphenation is to ensure that your document has with
\language=0 in the premable, surely? And since that's the standard way
to ensure that you have US English hyphenation in the absence of the
optional extra `Babel', what's the problem?
Look, the way it works is that *YOU* want to have all LaTeX
installations set up so your documents typeset without modification - or
so it seems. That's silly if you ask me, because it would make more
work for *ME* with every document I write. I set things up so that you
have to do more work to get your lingo on my LaTeX; and vice-versa. And
that makes sense to me, because it minimises the effort I put in to
creating documents and does not cause any problems.
Of course, if you want to play lucky dip and not specify which
hyphenation patterns to use, you can expect things to vary; but if you
pay attention to the standards and begin each of your documents with
\language=0, you will find that my standard LaTeX formats here would
process with the hyphenation that you are used to, exactly as they are
supposed to and according to the standard.
> The whole "but our sources will compile differently because the
> hyphenations will be different"
Eh? If you want identical hyphenation, then you may have it. I don't
understand your point here.
I use LaTeX to generate documents. If I were to send a document to
someone else for processing elsewhere, then I would consider the
hyphenation business - but not otherwise, because there is no need.
>reminds me of this website:
> <http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/>
> But I do think the argument is much more strong in the case of LaTeX.
What are you on about? I write documents that I compile on my TeX
installation. If I want to send 'em elsewhere, I tend to decide that
any hyphenation variation isn't a bother - after all, if you're a USian,
you'll be better off with US English hyphenation so you'll get *your*
standard, if you've got the same basic idea set up as me; and likewise
Brits.
After all, a USian is likely to need to format the document differently
if he wants to print it out, since he'll probably be using (what I view
as non-standard) US letter paper instead of the more widely used
international standard A4 size. So what does it matter if the
hyphenation also changes?
(I have been known to test with both hyphenation schemes in some cases)
Meanwhile, I don't have to put up with the ignomony of needing to tell
my computer what language to use every damned time I write a damned
document. My computer is supposed to be my willing slave, adapted to
meet my every whim. It's not, but I'm damned if I'm having it default
to working in a foreign language - which seems to be what you want me to
do. It's bad enough that Apple won't let me have an OS in my own lingo
any more - I'm damned well not going down that route with LaTeX.
> So anyway, I looked into how to change the default hyphenation patterns
> with babel installed. First I tried `texdoc babel`, but that didn't
> seem to help any, since it was assuming that the babel package was
> being loaded.
texdoc babel just gets me a local copy of the old CTAN catalogue page
(the one with the stealth links), and the links mostly don't seem to do
a damned thing. Certainly the documentation links reveals nothing. I
hate this sort of thing - fancy automation that's badly broken and just
leaves you stuck in the lurch. If it's not reliable, please don't foist
it on us.
<shrug> But then again, I never expect that sort of stuff to work.
Experience teaches me that that sort of fancy stuff always breaks down
and no-one ever gets it to work reliably.
I just wish it were possible to dig out the documentation by hand with
slightly less time and effort that it takes with MacTeX. It's a major
pain even doing a filename search in the relevant directories. Mind
you, it's a pain doing a filename search on any MacOS X Mac at all,
isn't it? Spotlight? It's just a sick joke, that's all. What sort of
a file search routine is it that cannot find files by filename with any
reliability?
I use EasyFind...
Spotlight is so crap, and EasyFind so slow, that I have *OFTEN*:
`tried Spotlight, tried EasyFind, and then found the file using
mouse/eyeball before EasyFind got there, with Spotlight never finding
the file by name'.
System 7.6.1 had many advantages over MacOS X - like a `find file'
command that worked.
> Then I remembered that LaTeX configuration information was documented
> in cfgguide and took a look there, but the instructions it gave for
> customising the hyphenation didn't mention babel and boiled down to
> what you essentially do already (if I recall correctly).
>
> However, it *does* give an example at the very end ("Non-standard
> versions") for how to generate your own format based on LaTeX, which
> boils down to running
> initex \&latex rmlatex
>
> on the file rmlatex.tex consisting of:
>
> \everyjob{\typeout{rmLaTeX 1.0 based on LaTeX2e \fmtversion}}
> \RequirePackage[british]{babel}
> \dump
>
> And that seems, to me, much easier than "unplugging babel" or whatever it was.
<puzzled> Well, no, not really. Unplugging Babel means `creating a
LaTeX format that does not load Babel' and is in itself trivial if I
were to use a command line iniTeX call - it involves a good deal less
work than what you've suggested above. Problem is, that method of
creating formats is not the one I want to use (see below).
And I cannot find your above example in my copy of cfgguide.tex.
I'm not looking for a non-standard LaTeX - I'm trying to build a
standard LaTeX format: just a standard LaTeX without Babel and using the
standard TeX mechanisms for multilingual hyphenation in the standard
LaTeX way, according to the standard comments in the various standard
LaTeX files that taught me how to do it in the standard way I am using.
<shrug> I remember when Babel was new, and I wanted to stick with the
uncomplicated standard ways of doing things - in part because they were
easier and more efficient - so I did.
/And/ I got contradictory information on various different methods of
how to do what I want with Babel - some of which told me I should
absolutely not do what other things told me I should do.
The standard documention on how to do it using a standard LaTeX that has
not had Babel added to it was /not/ contradictory.
The problem I had was wanting to find out how to do it for the full
range of formats in one fell swoop, using the standard MacTeX mechanisms
so everything would just keep working when I re-built formats after an
upgrade to LaTeX or whatever. And that was a bugger to find out about,
that one was. All the documentation I could find was utterly unhelpful.
Rowland.
Rowland McDonnell
That seems to be to be contradicting the requirements of various bits of
documentation here and there. I've read all sorts of warnings to `just
don't do that unless you understand what you are doing'. Don't ask me
where: I'd have to look again and I'm sick of reading pointless annoying
unhelpful documentation.
But: can you explain what makes it a `non-problem' from your point of
view?
I ask because I'd like to understand - because if I understood, I might
well set up Babel to give me UK English hyphenation by default.
> It is naturally also possible to write a local hyphen.cfg as -- contrary
> to Rolands
(This is an utterly trivial issue, but I do have a `w'. Us Rowlands
with a W are quite touchy about our Ws because people keep missing them
out and we don't half get irritated; not just me - it seems to be a
standard fitting in the other Rowlands with a W that I've come across.
All two of them...)
> claim -- LaTeX doesn't "comes with Babel as a standard
> fixture".
But this counter-claim of yours seems like utter nonsense to me.
Can you name me a current TeX distribution that is not set up to provide
LaTeX formats built with Babel by default?
Or explain why it is that Babel itself is now in the `Required' part of
CTAN?
Babel is - clearly - specified as a required part of LaTeX, and it seems
to me that all the main TeX distros are set up to give you LaTeX formats
that include Babel. Or have I missed any?
MacTeX does, MikTeX does (so my wife tells me), and I gather TeX Live
does too.
> The only thing LaTeX is doing is loading a hyphen.cfg -- and
> as user of polyglossia learned -- this don't need to be the one from
> babel.
Yes, I know all that. The standard hyphen.cfg in all TeX distros I know
of loads Babel. That's how come you get Babel as a standard fitting and
how come I think your claims about Babel are a bit odd because what I
see does contradict what you claim.
I subverted that hyphen.cfg mechanism to get what I want - I actually
hacked latex.ltx. Oh, it's very complicated stuff: my hacked
rmlatex.ltx loads rmhyphen.cfg instead of hyphen.cfg (cunning, eh?), so
I get the full set of Babelised formats /and/ my non-Babelised formats
(rm... variants) in one `create all my formats' command.
> It is easy to unplug the babel hyphen.cfg by putting another on
> first in the search path
It's very hard to do that with MacTeX, because it's bloody hard to
figure out what order things are searched in on the search path in my
experience (with MacTeX, it's very hard to find out about what's behind
the scenes at all). And impossible to test if what you've done is going
to work without rebuilding the formats - oh, far too much bother for me.
I don't like working that way.
So I chose a different method: one which I had confidence in, and one
which I understood.
>(and there are examples for simple alternatives
> on CTAN), but I don't see really why this should be done: the hyphen.cfg
> of babel has less that 400 lines of code. The strain on the memory are
> from the hyphenation patterns, and they are easy to configurate through
> the language.dat.
But I read documentation that told me not to do what you say to do - the
docs forbade changing things to provide anything other than US English
as the default when using Babel. I've never come across any such
restriction when using the standard LaTeX way of setting up local
hyphenation patterns, so I did it that way.
Rowland.
Enrico Gregorio
> I am generating a standard LaTeX format that typesets documents the same
> by default. I'm using \language=0 for US English hyphenation as
> demanded by the standard, and setting \language=1 to UK English -
> allowed within the standard. And I use \language=1 for my documents by
> default.
>
> All standard, according to spec.
\language=\csname l@ukenglish\endcsname
That's all, after having enabled ukenglish hyphenation in language.dat,
which is enabled by default in MacTeX. Is this so difficult or much more
complicated than saying \language=1 in all of your documents? I dare say
it isn't.
Ciao
Enrico
Juergen Fenn
Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
>>> There is only one LaTeX, after all, and Babel is not part of it...
>> there is indeed only one latex. however, babel (and a bunch of other
>> things) is a required part of a latex distribution.
>
> Really? Well, that's a new one on me. Hmm. Yep, I see that it's now
> in the `required' directory on CTAN. Since when has it been there?
Since long[tm]. Development of babel goes back to the early 1990s when
LaTeX learnt to typeset in languages other than English. I don't know
for sure, though, when it was included in the required collection, but
it has been there ever since I started being interested in TeX ... some
10 years ago...
>> as for the local tree stuff (which i don't understand), why don't you
>> have a single "personal" tree where you put stuff you need to work
>> with, and soft link every user's personal tree to that?
>
> The reason I'm not doing something like that is a great deal of
> doubtfulness on the part of the TeX on MacOS X mailing list denizens on
> how it wasn't likely to work smoothly, as I recall. Unix works with
> soft links. The MacOS has had aliases (similar, but different) for a
> while. Unix stuff often can't work with aliases; and Mac stuff
> apparently often falls over when presented with soft links.
>
> I blame NeXT and the iSteve.
> The Unix side is poorly integrated with the GUI side - and it's /very/
> non-Mac. And there's worse. Oh god... I /still/ blame NeXT and the
> iSteve.
These problems may depend on the version of Mac OS X you work with.
Leopard is said to be "an Open Brand UNIX 03 Registered Product,
conforming to the SUSv3 and POSIX 1003.1 specifications for the C API,
Shell Utilities, and Threads" according to
<http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html>
Jürgen.
Juergen Fenn
Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
> texdoc babel just gets me a local copy of the old CTAN catalogue page
> (the one with the stealth links), and the links mostly don't seem to do
> a damned thing.
When I input "texdoc babel" a babel.pdf opens in Preview... (MacTeX 2007).
However there *are* docs that have a completely different name than the
packages they describe. This is why I think in order to make texdoc work
more efficiently package authors should be required to provide manuals
that bear the same name as the packages they provide. This would be
quite helpful to most users.
Jürgen.
Dan
> Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
>
> >>> There is only one LaTeX, after all, and Babel is not part of it...
> >> there is indeed only one latex. however, babel (and a bunch of other
> >> things) is a required part of a latex distribution.
>
> > Really? Well, that's a new one on me. Hmm. Yep, I see that it's now
> > in the `required' directory on CTAN. Since when has it been there?
>
> Since long[tm]. Development of babel goes back to the early 1990s when
> LaTeX learnt to typeset in languages other than English. I don't know
> for sure, though, when it was included in the required collection, but
> it has been there ever since I started being interested in TeX ... some
> 10 years ago...
It was included in the "required" list since the required list was
established. My recollection is that this was only shortly after
LaTeX2e came about (2-3 years after, I think). I have just done
a quick search of google groups and found a post (from robin)
dated 5 Sep 2000 that mentions babel being in the required
collection.
He also says in that post
"the concept of the latex required distribution is a fairly
recent one"
so I'm guessing maybe 2 years or so before that post: 1998?
My interest in (La)TeX precedes LaTeX2e (and even the
establishment of CTAN) but my memory is not quite as
long as my involvement.
Dan
Robin Fairbairns
>Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
>[quoting me]
>>> there is indeed only one latex. however, babel (and a bunch of other
>>> things) is a required part of a latex distribution.
>>
>> Really? Well, that's a new one on me. Hmm. Yep, I see that it's now
>> in the `required' directory on CTAN. Since when has it been there?
>
>Since long[tm].
specifically, since early 1999. i had a meeting with frank mittelbach
and chris rowley in the first week of the year, and we agreed this was
the way to go. the idea is that anyone who writes a package is
entitled to assume that required packages are available.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Ulrike Fischer
>> I would simply change the order of the languages in language.dat so that
>> ukenglish is the first and so the one active when you don't use babel at
>> all. In miktex you can even do this through the GUI.
>
> That seems to be to be contradicting the requirements of various bits of
> documentation here and there. I've read all sorts of warnings to `just
> don't do that unless you understand what you are doing'. Don't ask me
> where: I'd have to look again and I'm sick of reading pointless annoying
> unhelpful documentation.
>
> But: can you explain what makes it a `non-problem' from your point of
> view?
Naturally because I understood the pointless, unhelpful documentation
and so now understand what I'm doing. And no: I will not rephrase the
documentation for you. You didn't understand me when I gave you the same
advice two years ago, and I'm sure you will not understand me now.
>> It is naturally also possible to write a local hyphen.cfg as -- contrary
>> to Rolands
>
> (This is an utterly trivial issue, but I do have a `w'.
Sorry.
>> claim -- LaTeX doesn't "comes with Babel as a standard
>> fixture".
>
> But this counter-claim of yours seems like utter nonsense to me.
>
> Can you name me a current TeX distribution that is not set up to provide
> LaTeX formats built with Babel by default?
Defaults are not fixtures.
>
> Or explain why it is that Babel itself is now in the `Required' part of
> CTAN?
>
> Babel is - clearly - specified as a required part of LaTeX, and it seems
> to me that all the main TeX distros are set up to give you LaTeX formats
> that include Babel. Or have I missed any?
>
> MacTeX does, MikTeX does (so my wife tells me), and I gather TeX Live
> does too.
Yes, it is really difficult to understand why systems like MikTeX,
written by a german and used by people all over the world, choose as
default a flexible multilingual setup when all _you_ need and care is UK
hyphenation.
> That seems to be to be contradicting the requirements of various bits of
> documentation here and there.
> But I read documentation that told me not to do what you say to do
It is quite interessant how often you cite documentations as witnesses
to reject suggestions. Aren't they all "pointless annoying and
unhelpful"?
--
Ulrike Fischer
Rowland McDonnell
> Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
>
> >>> There is only one LaTeX, after all, and Babel is not part of it...
> >> there is indeed only one latex. however, babel (and a bunch of other
> >> things) is a required part of a latex distribution.
> >
> > Really? Well, that's a new one on me. Hmm. Yep, I see that it's now
> > in the `required' directory on CTAN. Since when has it been there?
>
> Since long[tm]. Development of babel goes back to the early 1990s when
> LaTeX learnt to typeset in languages other than English.
Yes, I know. I started using LaTeX in the late 1980s - which is when I
wrote my first style files, too. And they were /really/ dodgy, they
were.
btw, LaTeX has always been adaptable to languages other than English.
LaTeX 2.09 came with instructions on how to do that - it's always had
the flexibility to be modified to speak `foreign' and TeX 3 has always
had multi-lingual hyphenation.
What Babel does is put together good sets of `foreign language LaTeX
setups' so that you don't have to roll your own and do get something
that works properly.
> I don't know
> for sure, though, when it was included in the required collection, but
> it has been there ever since I started being interested in TeX ... some
> 10 years ago...
`Required' since 1999, apparently. I stopped keeping up with all the
latest LaTeX developments round about Easter 1997 when I cracked up
(yes, it was that sudden).
> >> as for the local tree stuff (which i don't understand), why don't you
> >> have a single "personal" tree where you put stuff you need to work
> >> with, and soft link every user's personal tree to that?
> >
> > The reason I'm not doing something like that is a great deal of
> > doubtfulness on the part of the TeX on MacOS X mailing list denizens on
> > how it wasn't likely to work smoothly, as I recall. Unix works with
> > soft links. The MacOS has had aliases (similar, but different) for a
> > while. Unix stuff often can't work with aliases; and Mac stuff
> > apparently often falls over when presented with soft links.
> >
> > I blame NeXT and the iSteve.
>
> > The Unix side is poorly integrated with the GUI side - and it's /very/
> > non-Mac. And there's worse. Oh god... I /still/ blame NeXT and the
> > iSteve.
>
> These problems may depend on the version of Mac OS X you work with.
> Leopard is said to be "an Open Brand UNIX 03 Registered Product,
> conforming to the SUSv3 and POSIX 1003.1 specifications for the C API,
> Shell Utilities, and Threads" according to
> <http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html>
None of which has any bearing on the integration of the Unix side of
things with the Mac side of things.
To give you an idea what the nature of the issues are regarding aliases
and symlinks, take a look at this:
<http://yost.com/computers/aliaslinks/>
`aliaslinks
An enhancement over alias files,
incorporating BSD compatibility'
btw, MacOS X 10.5 (the helpful name for the OS you refer to by its
confusing marketing name) has had one vital component (Classic) removed
from it compared to 10.4, so I can't use it.
Rowland McDonnell
Righto - thanks for that.
1999 - yes, that explains why I missed it. I'd cracked up by then.
Rowland McDonnell
> Juergen Fenn <jf...@gmx.net> wrote:
> > Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
> >
> > >>> There is only one LaTeX, after all, and Babel is not part of it...
> > >> there is indeed only one latex. however, babel (and a bunch of other
> > >> things) is a required part of a latex distribution.
> >
> > > Really? Well, that's a new one on me. Hmm. Yep, I see that it's now
> > > in the `required' directory on CTAN. Since when has it been there?
> >
> > Since long[tm]. Development of babel goes back to the early 1990s when
> > LaTeX learnt to typeset in languages other than English. I don't know
> > for sure, though, when it was included in the required collection, but
> > it has been there ever since I started being interested in TeX ... some
> > 10 years ago...
>
> It was included in the "required" list since the required list was
> established.
I don't recall it being in `required' from the word go.
[snip]
> My interest in (La)TeX precedes LaTeX2e (and even the
> establishment of CTAN) but my memory is not quite as
> long as my involvement.
Ditto, except that while my memory is long enough, it's not reliable
enough.
Robin Fairbairns
>Dan <luec...@uark.edu> wrote:
>> [babel]
>> It was included in the "required" list since the required list was
>> established.
>
>I don't recall it being in `required' from the word go.
it was. the only thing that's been added since i set the tree up, is
the cyrillic stuff.
mind you, i suspect you're misunderstanding dan, who merely claimed
that babel has been required as long as there was a concept of
"required latex package".
>[snip]
>
>> My interest in (La)TeX precedes LaTeX2e (and even the
>> establishment of CTAN) but my memory is not quite as
>> long as my involvement.
>
>Ditto, except that while my memory is long enough, it's not reliable
>enough.
it happens, i know. :-(
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Rowland McDonnell
> real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet (Rowland McDonnell) writes:
> >Dan <luec...@uark.edu> wrote:
> >> [babel]
> >> It was included in the "required" list since the required list was
> >> established.
> >
> >I don't recall it being in `required' from the word go.
>
> it was. the only thing that's been added since i set the tree up, is
> the cyrillic stuff.
Righto - ta.
> mind you, i suspect you're misunderstanding dan, who merely claimed
> that babel has been required as long as there was a concept of
> "required latex package".
Yeah, I was thinking of the introduction of the `required' tree at CTAN
as being that time.
<shrug> Thing is, I never did use Babel so my mind probably just
blanked its existence. Or something. I don't know, but there you go.
My memory's rubbish.
> >[snip]
> >
> >> My interest in (La)TeX precedes LaTeX2e (and even the
> >> establishment of CTAN) but my memory is not quite as
> >> long as my involvement.
> >
> >Ditto, except that while my memory is long enough, it's not reliable
> >enough.
>
> it happens, i know. :-(
My memory's been rubbish ever since I was tiny. God knows what'll
happen when I start to get really old and crusty.
Rowland McDonnell
> schrieb Rowland McDonnell:
>
> >> I would simply change the order of the languages in language.dat so that
> >> ukenglish is the first and so the one active when you don't use babel at
> >> all. In miktex you can even do this through the GUI.
> >
> > That seems to be to be contradicting the requirements of various bits of
> > documentation here and there. I've read all sorts of warnings to `just
> > don't do that unless you understand what you are doing'. Don't ask me
> > where: I'd have to look again and I'm sick of reading pointless annoying
> > unhelpful documentation.
> >
> > But: can you explain what makes it a `non-problem' from your point of
> > view?
>
> Naturally because I understood the pointless, unhelpful documentation
> and so now understand what I'm doing. And no: I will not rephrase the
> documentation for you. You didn't understand me when I gave you the same
> advice two years ago, and I'm sure you will not understand me now.
But I did and do understand you.
What I do not understand is what is the correct way to do the job,
taking into account all the relevant factors.
It seems strange that you think I didn't understand how to do the
required job - the problem is that I've got documentation which tells me
that I should not do what you suggest.
I've had Robin Fairbairns convince me that the method I worked out
myself of modifying the language.dat files is the right thing to do
regardless of what the documenation says, so that's what I'll do.
The problem was that I had something here telling me not to do that.
> >> It is naturally also possible to write a local hyphen.cfg as -- contrary
> >> to Rolands
> >
> > (This is an utterly trivial issue, but I do have a `w'.
>
> Sorry.
No need for an apology - the matter is trivial. (it still annoys me a
bit - but that's a stupid over-reaction on my part)
> >> claim -- LaTeX doesn't "comes with Babel as a standard
> >> fixture".
> >
> > But this counter-claim of yours seems like utter nonsense to me.
> >
> > Can you name me a current TeX distribution that is not set up to provide
> > LaTeX formats built with Babel by default?
>
> Defaults are not fixtures.
I think the problem is that you failed to come to a proper understanding
of what I wrote.
In the particular context in question, as I used the phrase, a
`_standard_ fixture' is obviously a default.
That is how I meant the words to be understood. I've sat here and
thought about it and concluded that there's nothing remotely odd or hard
to understand about that use of the phrase `standard fixture'.
Fixtures are not necessarily defaults; but *standard* fixtures are
defaults by definition: that's what the `standard' bit means.
I could understand you making that mistake if you had a poor command of
the English language, but your use of English here does indicate that
you're pretty good at it.
> > Or explain why it is that Babel itself is now in the `Required' part of
> > CTAN?
> >
> > Babel is - clearly - specified as a required part of LaTeX, and it seems
> > to me that all the main TeX distros are set up to give you LaTeX formats
> > that include Babel. Or have I missed any?
> >
> > MacTeX does, MikTeX does (so my wife tells me), and I gather TeX Live
> > does too.
>
> Yes, it is really difficult to understand why systems like MikTeX,
You might find it hard to understand; I've already explained that I
understand just how insanely useful it is for those who use lingos other
than English (in the US style in particular).
> written by a german and used by people all over the world, choose as
> default a flexible multilingual setup when all _you_ need and care is UK
> hyphenation.
I know exactly why Babel is useful. I need more than UK English
hyphenation. I need US English as well. I have implemented this
without Babel. I do not complain about Babel.
So why are you so hostile at this point?
(By the way, do remember that the UK has more than one language - Welsh,
(Northern) Irish, and Scottish people in particular are likely to be
irritated if you suggest that the only UK language is English. And then
there's Kernow - silly sods, they are)
> > That seems to be to be contradicting the requirements of various bits of
> > documentation here and there.
>
> > But I read documentation that told me not to do what you say to do
>
> It is quite interessant how often you cite documentations as witnesses
> to reject suggestions. Aren't they all "pointless annoying and
> unhelpful"?
You seem to have some very strange ideas about things.
Not all documentation is bad. I have lots of very good documentation.
I wrote some of the useful documentation I have on TeX myself - and yes,
some of my documentation is on CTAN for others to use.
I read the damned documentation to try to work out what's what. I glean
as much information from the documentation as I can - it's very hard
with the documentation that comes with MacTeX, because almost all that
documentation is very very bad. It's a lot worse than what I was used
to with OzTeX, and the TeX on MacOS X mailing list is a hostile
environment and nothing like as useful and helpful as the OzTeX mailing
list of old.
When I read documentation that contradicts advice I am given, I ask
about it so that I can find out what's going on.
All that seems like normal rational behaviour from a decently
intelligent decently educated human being.
I find it quite interesting that you seem to think it's a sign of some
sort of pathologically disturbed behaviour.
Maybe you don't like the idea that I question your instructions? Some
people dislike having their authority questioned, I do know that.
Can you explain why you have made the error of judgement you made above,
or why your behaviour is so hostile?
Rowland McDonnell
> Rowland McDonnell schrieb:
>
> > texdoc babel just gets me a local copy of the old CTAN catalogue page
> > (the one with the stealth links), and the links mostly don't seem to do
> > a damned thing.
>
> When I input "texdoc babel" a babel.pdf opens in Preview... (MacTeX 2007).
Yeah, could be - this machine has MacTeX 2006 on it still. I've not
dared upgrade it yet - the other Mac in the house has MacTeX 2007.
> However there *are* docs that have a completely different name than the
> packages they describe. This is why I think in order to make texdoc work
> more efficiently package authors should be required to provide manuals
> that bear the same name as the packages they provide. This would be
> quite helpful to most users.
I think it would be a much better idea to re-work the TDS, so that code
and documentation were not stored in separate places.
What I'm thinking is that it'd be more useful to arrange things more
like this sort of thing:
<blah>/texmf.tetex/tex/latex/<packagename>/doc/
<blah>/texmf.tetex/tex/latex/<packagename>/code/
<blah>/texmf.tetex/tex/latex/<packagename>/source/
Or similar (the code directory in the above example needs to be replaced
with multiple directories at that level to meet the needs of TeX
systems, I reckon), so that flexible arrangements for documentation can
be provided without the user being lost because where the documentation
is kept is obvious.
(And that strikes me as a slightly less 1970s approach than the one in
use at the moment - I wish I knew what made it a good idea to split up
related data into different parts of the directory tree. As far as TDS
goes, my main question is `But why?')
How to get this working with texdoc?
I don't know the full details of what texdoc does, but how about just
tell it to look in the appropriate /doc directory for a file
<packagename>.pdf and if no such file exists, display a numbered list of
what files *are* in that directory, and prompt for `which file in this
numbered list do you want to view'?
Rowland McDonnell
It's not that it's harder[1]: the issue is that I have read
documentation that told me `Don't do that unless you know what you're
doing', and I've not been able to find out what the problem is that
caused the advice I read to be made.
That's why I did it a non-Babel way - because it's a way that's not
suggested as a bad method by anything I've read and it is a way that's a
standard way of doing it.
Rowland.
[1] I did work out how to do that myself back when I first installed
MacTeX, and it was a lot harder to work out than the method I have been
using until now. /MUCH/ harder. But that's not the problem.
Rowland McDonnell
> Enrico Gregorio <grego...@math.unipd.it> wrote:
> Wait, Rowland, you have the line \language=1 in all your documents?
No, the format sets \language=1. \language=0 for US English hyphenation
is available if I want it, but it's \language=1 by default.
[snip]
Enrico Gregorio
Save the following script as rmpdflatex in some place where the system
looks for executables (for example, /usr/local/bin) and enable its
permissions as "rwxr-xr-x"
=====
#!/bin/sh
pdflatex "\language=\csname l@ukenglish\endcsname\input $1"
=====
No need to create non standard formats. In case you need to pass other
options to pdflatex it's slightly more complicated, but standard shell
scripting anyway.
Ciao
Enrico
Robin Fairbairns
the present structure allows the library to trim the search very near
to its root, since it knows what sort of object it's looking for.
your suggestion would have it distinguishing leaf directories for
every package on the tree.
>How to get this working with texdoc?
texdoc is made simpler by your proposed layout. however,
documentation is browsed on a human timescale, whereas files for
inclusion in a document are located on the sub-second timescales of
document compilation -- if we're going to optimise anything, we should
concentrate on finding files for compilation.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Rowland McDonnell
[snip]
> Save the following script as rmpdflatex in some place where the system
> looks for executables (for example, /usr/local/bin) and enable its
> permissions as "rwxr-xr-x"
>
> =====
> #!/bin/sh
> pdflatex "\language=\csname l@ukenglish\endcsname\input $1"
> =====
>
> No need to create non standard formats.
I don't do that now: my formats are standard, just not the same as the
defaults. RTFM - it'll explain how come. The method I use is just the
standard way of doing it without Babel.
> In case you need to pass other
> options to pdflatex it's slightly more complicated, but standard shell
> scripting anyway.
Righto - thank you. It's a neat looking approach.
Rowland.
Rowland McDonnell
> real-addr...@flur.bltigibbet (Rowland McDonnell) writes:
> >Juergen Fenn <jf...@gmx.net> wrote:
[snip]
Righto - but why not? I can see one advantage of the TDS method now -
but why not make the machinery work harder? Modern PCs certainly have
the power to do the job required without much delay and I can't help
feeling it'd make installing and maintaining things easier.
Well, it does for me - it's how I did it with OzTeX...
> >How to get this working with texdoc?
>
> texdoc is made simpler by your proposed layout.
Oh! Righto.
> however,
> documentation is browsed on a human timescale,
Yeah, but it's sometimes damned hard to track down - myself, I find it
easier if `all the stuff to do with one package' is all in one place.
Installing TeX stuff and managing the TeX installation is easier too if
everything's in one place.
And yes I know that there is automation that's supposed to sort things
out - but my experience of that sort of thing is that it's fine until it
breaks, whereupon it makes a horribly nasty mess. So I eschew that sort
of automation and do it by hand.
> whereas files for
> inclusion in a document are located on the sub-second timescales of
> document compilation -- if we're going to optimise anything, we should
> concentrate on finding files for compilation.
Hmm. Good point.
But since the extra directory leaves that my proposal adds are right at
the bottom of the directory tree, surely they'd not slow down
compilation times to speak of? That is, if `code' is being looked for
in a tree structured like this:
<blah>/texmf.tetex/tex/latex/<packagename>/doc/
<blah>/texmf.tetex/tex/latex/<packagename>/code/
<blah>/texmf.tetex/tex/latex/<packagename>/source/
then `that which is trying to find the file' just dives straight into
<blah>/texmf.tetex/tex/latex/<packagename>/code/.
How is that significantly slower than going to
<blah>/texmf.tetex/tex/latex/<packagename>?
Point is, if you're searching for stuff only in the `code' subdirectory,
then you're not having to search more places than before, are you?
I dunno - I'm thinking of these index files that exist for speeding up
searches - surely with that kind of help and modern computers, search
times are going to be knocked down to sub microsecond these days? Which
is not necessarily a trivial delay - but surely it can't matter in the
case of then having to go away and read a file off disc?
(FWIW, this business of putting `all the stuff for one thing in one
place, with code in *that* sub-dir tree, documentation off in another,
and so on' is what has been implemented in the MacOS for normal
applications. If you happen to visit a Mac, right-click on an
application icon, `show package contents', and you'll see it all there.
Some apps aren't packages; most are. I'm told that Acorn implemented a
very similar scheme many years earlier in RISCOS.)
Go on, tell me what I've got wrong. ;-)
Wolfgang Arsenpflug
> Simon Spiegel <si...@simifilm.ch> wrote:
>
>
> So, Herr Speigel: would you care to provide some numerical data to back
> up your interesting claim that I prefer to hurl personal abuse rather
> than providing technical information or otherwise engaging with this
> newsgroup in a proper fashion?[1]
Ach der lieber!
>
> I'll admit I've been known to make the odd sharp retort, but I'm hoping
> to draw upon your comprehensive statistical database of my collected
> Usenet writings for a fully reliable view of the situation.
>
> What fraction of my posts to this newsgroup contain on-topic technical
> discussion, and what fraction contain personal abuse? We know you have
> a large numerical database collated to analyse my Usenet activity: I'm
> sure you can look up the answer and provide it very quickly.
53.7%
>
> What are the exact figures?
>
> And please, please, please send the data to me via email: this sort of
> thing really doesn't belong on comp.text.tex.
Das Arschloch.
>
> Rowland.
>
> [1] I note that you have ignored my questions to you so far[2]. And you
> have snipped (without comment) my technical comments and questions about
> TeX - completely ignoring all the on-topic parts of my post, in fact. I
> find this very strange behaviour on your part - why do you keep trying
> to push threads off topic?
>
> [2] Look, I'm pompous, I know it, and I can't help it any more than
> Graham Norton can help being camp, all right? It's an affliction.
Der verdammte Schweinehund.
"I've never been able to deal with bullying bitches like you. And you're
hounding me on this newsgroup - you're obsessed with me, aren't you?"
Rowland McDonnel - The Misogynist Series - 28 Nov 2007
"Why do you do it? What's caused this barrage of bitchiness? Why do you
keep hounding me? Why this constant harrassment? Why are you stalking
me? Why can't you leave me alone you evil woman?"
Rowland McDonnell - Afraid of Girls - 28 Nov 2007
"I wish I understood what makes someone turn as aggressive, unreasonable,
vicious, nasty, bitchy and underhand as you."
Rowland McDonnell preaching to Chrissy - September 7, 2007
"You're all worthless scum - worthless, that is, until you've been
composted down and used to grow something worthwhile like cattle feed."
Rowland McDonnell's fascination with compost - Oct 19, 2007
"Condescending, too - but if you don't mind being shown up for an
embittered hated-filled bitch, you carry on bitching and carping and
hounding me."
Rowland McDonnell - Misogynist - 28 Nov 2007
"Either that, or it'll prove they'll vote for anyone - even a woman! - to
keep the niggers out of office."
Rowland McDonnell - Clueless - 13Jan08
"I know what's up with Val/Verity/Chrissy - she's just a nasty bitch of a
type I've met many, many times. Funnily enough, the first nasty bitch
of her sort whom I met was also doing a physics degree... "
Rowland McDonnell - Beaten by GIRLS - Nov 28, 2007
" btw, my conscience does not prevent me from murdering: the certainty
of being caught and imprisoned is what does that. "
Rowland McDonnell - No Conscience - 11 Feb 08
"But I don't want to see the murder - I don't find murder nice in
general, it's just that it'd be aesthetically pleasing to laugh at your
murder, given the circumstances."
Rowland McDonnell - laughing at murder - 12Dec07
" I'll be sure to spare a chuckle when I
see the report of your painful and brutal murder in the newspapers -
it's bound to happen, given your loathesome opinions."
Rowland McDonnell thinks murder is funny - 12 Dec 07
"Crawl back to your hole and stay there, you uneducated, ill-bred coward.
Do not trouble the human race with your presence again."
Rowland McDonnell insults Tricky Woo - October 31, 2006
"I thought you were a malicious piece of shit, and I was right, wasn't I?"
Rowland McDonnell abusing Dr. Tom - August 24, 2007
"Your posts to me are generally nothing but nasty, bitchy, despicable
nastiness. I know of nothing that could possibly justify the vileness
you spew over this newsgroup on a near daily basis."
Rowland McDonnell - High Priest of Nastiness - Sept. 7, 2007
"my dismissal of your opinions is because I have read this group for a long
time and so I know that you are a complete and utter prat".
Simon Dobbs's accurate assessment of Rowland McDonnell' - 04 Oct 07
" I have a balanced view of women. I can see
the real thing. Unlike you, I don't try to pretend that women are all
nice people. Some women - and you're a classic example - are very
nasty."
Rowland McDonnell - The Mysognist Series - 29 Nov 2007
"Well, I had just got hold of someone a *LOT* bigger than me (he was
doing Bad Things to me and I wanted him to stop) and somehow managed to
get his head under my arm so I could repeatedly smash his head into a
wall while punching him in the face."
Rowland McDonnell's violent fantasies - Oct 15, 2007
"You are a fool, and since you are clearly irrevocably and incorrigibly
committed to remaining one, it is pointless to do anything other than
occasionally draw others' attention to your stupidity lest they be misled."
nemo_outs assessment of Rowland McDonnell - Oct 19, 2007
"Well, yeah, like meeting half a dozen consultant shrinks and finding out
that they're all a bunch of incompetent bullying lying ignorant abusive
bastards."
Rowland McDonnell foaming at the mouth - Nov 28, 2007
"Oh and there is very little that Rowland actually likes. He hates the
world, basically."
Sarah Balfour dumps on Rowland McDonnell - Oct. 26, 2007
"He's taken it upon himself to attack me and hound me and generally
behave very nastily towards me because he's decided to hate me and so
feels justified in his vile and nasty behaviour towards me."
Trollin' Rowland McDonnell finds a new enemy - 03 Dec 07
"The trolls - well, I just ignore 'em all. They're my real enemies and
while I'm sure that they're picking up on all sorts of shit to quote at
various times, only the moronic or malicious readers of this newsgroup
could give them any serious thought, so I'm not at all bothered by them."
Rowland McDonnell on ignoring trolls - August 26, 2007
"I'm telling you that I'm right and you're wrong and that's that."
Rowland McDonnell - July 2007
"Well, they know that I want to hunt them down and kill them
but haven't done so because it's illegal."
Rowland McDonnell - A bad case of troll paranoia.
"I know your game, I know you're scum, and I only decided to read your
post at all because I thought it might be a nasty bit of work in a place
where I won't have it."
Rowland McDonnell in melt down - again! Nov 28, 2007
"Most mothers are selfish self-centred child abusers from what I've seen."
Rowland McDonnell the Misogynist - Nov 28, 2007
"DO NOT BE DECEIVED!! DO NOT BE TAKEN IN LIKE I WAS!! ROWLAND MCDONNELL
IS *NOT* YOUR FRIEND!!!"
Sarah - October 23, 2007
"Folks, don't be decieved, the real Rowland is a billion times worse
than he *EVER* has been here! Take it from someone he's physically
assaulted. On more than one occasion. Then he had the audacity to
claim he'd not done me any harm - and went on to claim it was my
fault!"
Sarah Jane Balfour - 20 Apr 07
"Psychiatrists live in cloud cuckoo land dispensing evil abuse daily.."
Rowland McDonnell dissing psychiatrists. - 28 Nov 2007
"Some people get their sexual thrills that way - being nasty to others,
that is. Does it turn you on to attack me? If so, at least I'd have
some sort of reason for *WHY* you have to behave in such a filthy
fashion."
Rowland "Filthy" McDonnell boohooing - Nov. 27, 2007
"Why should I give a shit about those who have caused my suffering? Why
should I give a shit about those who did nothing to help me? Why should
I give a shit about someone suffering a minor emotional problem that any
human being should have learnt how to cope with in childhood?"
Rowland McDonnell on shit - September 12, 2007
"I'm trying to train you to behave like a decent human being rather
than a snarling, unreasoning animal."
Rowland McDonnell - Animal Trainer - Nov 27, 2007
"Okay, okay, okay, I know that with *some* posters, I
do lay into them a bit. But only the total shits who would be given a
right slapping in a just and fair society."
Trollin' Rowland McDonnell - Nov. 17, 2007
"The trolls are liars, every one of them: dishonest, cowardly, underhand
sneaks - vermin in human shape, in the same league as amoebic dysentery.
Most trolls seem perfectly happy to engage in criminal behaviour via the
'net (quite a lot of the upsd trolls have engaged in criminal activity -
computer crime - to my certain knowledge). They know it's extremely
unlikely that they'll get caught." - Rowland McDonnell in full troll
paranoia (August 2007)
"Some of your posts have been so vile that they've turned my stomach -
hence my strong comments. Sarah clearly feels much the same as me about
'em."
Pope Roland McDonnell pontificating - Sept. 29, 2007
"Fuck off and die you vile hypocrite."
Rowland McDonnel - Another witty observation. - Nov 28, 2007
"But I think that dismissing someone with `Whatever' is the most
antisocial and enraging way of dismissing someone that's ever been
developed, and should be considered an acceptable reason by the courts
for punching somone in the face."
Rowland McDonnell on justice - Sept 10, 2007
"Why? Does abusing me give you an erection? Does it impress the girls?
Or do you just do it because it makes you feel all big and strong?"
- Rowland McDonnell whinging on August 13, 2007
"And I just wish you'd stop being nasty, that's all. I hate it, hate
those who treat others badly."
Rowland McDonnell on nastiness. Pot? Kettle? August 29, 2007
"He's a /very/ nasty piece of work - one of the shittier trolling types
in here."
Rowland McDonnell abusing nigel - 10 Dec 07
"I suggest you start thinking about *why* people say the things to you
that they do, rather than just believing that everyone's out to get
you for absolutely no reason whatsoever (which is complete bollocks,
and you know it, deep down...)."
Sarah's advice to Rowlikins - Jan 1, 2008
"And then a much slower death for the proprietor and editor together, in
public, as an example and warning to others. And make sure a record of
the deaths goes on YouTube. Not murder, not an execution: vermin
extermination."
Rowland McDonnell - A sick mind - Jan. 24, 2008
"Fuck off and die you vile hypocrite."
Rowland McDonnel - Another witty observation. - Nov 28, 2007
"And then a much slower death for the proprietor and editor together, in
public, as an example and warning to others. And make sure a record of
the deaths goes on YouTube. Not murder, not an execution: vermin
extermination."
Rowland McDonnell - A sick mind - Jan. 24, 2008
"How could I do that if I don't know how to fight? Well, I do know how
to run, and I could run away and then run back again."
Fighting Rowland McDonnell - The Warrior - 24/12/2007
"Oh yes, I'll certainly make posts designed to irritate - but I do like
to think that I pick my targets carefully in this newsgroup at least".
Rowland McDonnell the Troll - October 3, 2007
"I'm sneering at you because of your deeply snotty sneers in my
direction, you obnoxious piece of shit."
Rowland McDonnell on how many bits in a byte - 28Mar08
" And most shrinks are shits. From personal experience,
I'd say about 80% of them are unfit for purpose and really
ought to be taken outside and shot for the evil
that they have done."
Rowland McDonnel - Violent Fantasies - 17 Dec 07
"I'm shit at making decisions because I'm lousy at implementing any
decision I make. Lousy at doing anything at all, as it happens."
Rowland McDonnell - Lousy at Heart - 11 Jan 08
"You attack rather than explain: confirmation
that you are as I say an utterly shameless liar."
Rowland McDonnell - Slagging Woody - March 28, 2008
"I'll say what the hell I like, and anyone who
tries to stop me will just get more of what he's complained about. Call
it bloodymindedness if you like, complain at me for being a prat in such
matters - but don't try ordering me around."
Rowdy Rowland McDonnell - 4 Feb 08
"I missed a rugby tackle once and slide face-first
through some horse shit that was just
over the touch line."
Rowland McDonnell on horse shit - October 7, 2007
"You're a deeply despicable bit of pond scum, you are."
Rowland McDonnell takes up biology - 28Mar08
"What you have to remember is that our dearly beloved
Rowland has a persecution complex - he honestly does
believe that the entire planet is out to get him."
Sarah Balfour - Rowland's Toy - 31 Jan 08
"And I don't suppose you could understand any of that - never mind, let
it stand that you are low-life scum who does not deserve to be permitted
to live in Britain."
Rowland McDonnell - Kick them out - May 5, 2008
"Since when has that ever stopped you?! Ripping one of your oldest and
closest friends to shreds for absolutely no fucking reason what-so-
fucking-ever certainly does make you a "bad person" in my eyes *at the
moment*..."
Sarah J. Balfour - Rowland McDonnell's Sins - Jan 1, 2008
"I'm using dishonest ranting tactics here. I am not striving for any
accuracy."
Rowland McDonnell - Dishonest - 05May, 2008
"Best you don't take any of my posts to this thread *TOO* seriously.
That would be a mistake."
Rowland McDonnell - He's bullshitting again - May 5, 2008
"People like you make me wish I were a murdering psychopath so I wouldn't
be as restrained as I am. The world doesn't need your sort and I am not
ashamed but deeply angry that Britain contains scum like you."
"I know your game, I know you're scum, and I only decided to read your
post at all because I thought it might be a nasty bit of work in a place
where I won't have it."
Rowland McDonnell in melt down - again! Nov 28, 2007
"Kill the shrinks, kill the psychiatric nurses, kill the lot of them. It's
the only civilised, reasonable response, I reckon."
Rowland McDonnell - A logical man - Jan 17, 2008
"People like you make me wish I were a murdering psychopath so I wouldn't
be as restrained as I am. The world doesn't need your sort and I am not
ashamed but deeply angry that Britain contains scum like you."
Rowland McDonnell - Wants to be a psychopath - May 5, 2008
"My bitching about people here is entirely in response to particular
posts - basically, it's me whinging about nasty people. You, on the
other hand, have been throwing gratuitous insults about me into upsd
just to be nasty to me."
The Gospel According to Rowland McDonnell - Dec 6, 2007
"I'm sick and tired of your despicable and dishonest accusations that you
keep hurling at me apparently to legitimise your extremely obnoxious
posts about me."
Rowland McDonnell - The Victim - March 7, 2008
"I've met a lot more objectionable white English people than any other
sort of person I can think of."
Rowland McDonnell - Dissing the English - 05May08
"It's just that they want the darkies out, and I want them gone.
But like them, I'd be happy to see extreme violence used
against the unworthy."
Rowland McDonnell - happy with extreme violence - May 6, 2008
"No point in trying to threaten the buggers - I can't fight,
so I've got to hit 'em when they're not expecting it and they've got to
go down almost straight away or I'm in the shit really, really deeply."
Rowland McDonnell - The Chicken - Dec 22, 2007
"The cruelty and absence of professional ethics demonstrated by the
psychiatric profession throughout its history has long angered, upset,
and disgusted me."
Rowland McDonnell - A logical Man - 17 Jan 08
"You, on the other hand, are an arrogant bullying piece of shit."
Rowland McDonnell playing with his friends in USCM - March 30, 2008
" I'll be sure to spare a chuckle when I
see the report of your painful and brutal murder in the newspapers -
it's bound to happen, given your loathesome opinions."
Rowland McDonnell thinks murder is funny - 12 Dec 07
"I've been using Usenet since before the Web was invented -
probably before you were born."
Rowland McDonnell - Inventor of Usenet - 15 Nov 2007