On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 09:14:14AM +, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
>Ken Brown wrote:
>>On 8/1/2012 10:18 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>>> It can be argued that emacs-auctex should not pull in texlive. Most
>>> users installing emacs-auctex will already have some flavor of tex in
>>> place, and not necessar
On 02/08/2012 9:18 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
On 8/2/2012 5:14 AM, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
Ken Brown wrote:
On 8/1/2012 10:18 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
It can be argued that emacs-auctex should not pull in texlive. Most
users installing emacs-auctex will already have some flavor of tex in
place, and not
On 8/2/2012 5:14 AM, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
Ken Brown wrote:
On 8/1/2012 10:18 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
It can be argued that emacs-auctex should not pull in texlive. Most
users installing emacs-auctex will already have some flavor of tex in
place, and not necessarily the cygwin one (like the OP,
Ryan Johnson wrote:
>On 02/08/2012 5:14 AM, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
>> Inconsistency harms least astonishment, and harming least astonishment
>> makes me very sad.
>While I agree with you completely, http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#MSFTEU.
>Maybe they can make an exception "just this once" ...
Aha! How
On 02/08/2012 5:14 AM, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
Inconsistency harms least astonishment, and harming least astonishment
makes me very sad.
While I agree with you completely, http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#MSFTEU.
Maybe they can make an exception "just this once" ...
--
Problem reports: http:/
Ken Brown wrote:
>On 8/1/2012 10:18 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>> It can be argued that emacs-auctex should not pull in texlive. Most
>> users installing emacs-auctex will already have some flavor of tex in
>> place, and not necessarily the cygwin one (like the OP, or perhaps a
>> MikTex user). Plus,
On 8/1/2012 10:18 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
It can be argued that emacs-auctex should not pull in texlive. Most
users installing emacs-auctex will already have some flavor of tex in
place, and not necessarily the cygwin one (like the OP, or perhaps a
MikTex user). Plus, the error message is pretty
Ryan Johnson writes:
> It can be argued that emacs-auctex should not pull in texlive.
The only "official" TeX available in Cygwin is TeXlive and setup doesn't
support "recommends", so...
> It makes sense that gtk-doc needs dblatex, *if* the former is used to
> create/update documentation rather t
On 01/08/2012 9:13 AM, Ken Brown wrote:
On 8/1/2012 8:04 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
On 31/07/2012 6:07 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
On 7/30/2012 1:33 AM, Wynfield Henman wrote:
I use the in-the-wild, 'texlive 2012' distribution, which I like to
tinker with and customize.
Due to a, what I believe is a dep
On 8/1/2012 8:04 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
On 31/07/2012 6:07 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
On 7/30/2012 1:33 AM, Wynfield Henman wrote:
I use the in-the-wild, 'texlive 2012' distribution, which I like to
tinker with and customize.
Due to a, what I believe is a dependency by auctex on texlive for some
rea
On 31/07/2012 6:07 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
On 7/30/2012 1:33 AM, Wynfield Henman wrote:
I use the in-the-wild, 'texlive 2012' distribution, which I like to
tinker with and customize.
Due to a, what I believe is a dependency by auctex on texlive for some
reason, I keep getting a list of about 10 tex
On 7/30/2012 1:33 AM, Wynfield Henman wrote:
I use the in-the-wild, 'texlive 2012' distribution, which I like to
tinker with and customize.
Due to a, what I believe is a dependency by auctex on texlive for some
reason, I keep getting a list of about 10 texlive related packages
automatically appen
12 matches
Mail list logo
