Am Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:39:06 -0700 schrieb Chris Travers:
>> So the limit is five years (but only for the latex kernel).
>> The version date of my (current) latex.ltx ist
>> \edef\fmtversion{2011/06/27}
>>> Or is XeTeX not intended to be used in these environments?
>> I would say that if your la
2011/10/19 Ulrike Fischer :
> Am Tue, 18 Oct 2011 07:39:06 -0700 schrieb Chris Travers:
>
>>> So the limit is five years (but only for the latex kernel).
>>> The version date of my (current) latex.ltx ist
>>> \edef\fmtversion{2011/06/27}
>
Or is XeTeX not intended to be used in these environme
A few thoughts here as to where I think solutions lie.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> The problem is that there seems to a mounting number on Linux users
> which are reluctant to install software without using there package
> manager. And there seems to be a mounting n
Am Wed, 19 Oct 2011 03:19:48 -0700 schrieb Chris Travers:
> And obviously this puts a lot us in bad positions. If RHEL 6
> (released about a year ago) is sticking to TeXLive 2007, we all have
> problems. The question is what the community can reasonably do, and
> what developers can be expected
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:45 AM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> Well I'm a windows user so actually I'm not really affected. But
> imho the linux distros should rethink their installation methods and
> installation advices. It is absurd that 10 or more distros invest a
> lot of main power in making pack
Am Wed, 19 Oct 2011 05:59:16 -0700 schrieb Chris Travers:
> This matches my needs very well. If my clients are running accounting
> systems, the last thing I want is an upgrade of TexLive to break their
> ability to generate invoices.
Normally you get more problems if you can't update ;-)
> If
Am 19.10.2011 um 12:19 schrieb Chris Travers:
> If RHEL 6 (released about a year ago) is sticking to TeXLive 2007, we all
> have problems.
The only problem is that of understanding. It's like the fifth wheel or the
tool to change wheels that come with new car. They're not really usable,
they'
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> Am Wed, 19 Oct 2011 05:59:16 -0700 schrieb Chris Travers:
>
>> This matches my needs very well. If my clients are running accounting
>> systems, the last thing I want is an upgrade of TexLive to break their
>> ability to generate invoices.
2011/10/19 Chris Travers :
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:45 AM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
>
>> Well I'm a windows user so actually I'm not really affected. But
>> imho the linux distros should rethink their installation methods and
>> installation advices. It is absurd that 10 or more distros invest a
>
On 19/10/2011 14:53, Chris Travers wrote:
> You get more problems with things suddenly and unexpectedly breaking
> if you don't change them? On what theory?
>
> At least if you don't include deliberate breakage of programs over a
> certain age..
The 'expiry date' in LaTeX2e was there for goo
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:10 AM, Peter Dyballa wrote:
>
> Am 19.10.2011 um 12:19 schrieb Chris Travers:
>
>> If RHEL 6 (released about a year ago) is sticking to TeXLive 2007, we all
>> have problems.
>
> The only problem is that of understanding. It's like the fifth wheel or the
> tool to chang
2011/10/19 Chris Travers :
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
>> Am Wed, 19 Oct 2011 05:59:16 -0700 schrieb Chris Travers:
>>
>>> This matches my needs very well. If my clients are running accounting
>>> systems, the last thing I want is an upgrade of TexLive to break their
On Oct 19, 2011, at 9:06 AM, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> ... Once I cooperated with a man working on Mac. The
> document was written in XeLaTeX and used DejaVu fonts. Mac had a
> different version of DejaVu fonts and the result was that the document
> was one page shorter on Linux than on Mac. Thus yo
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Joseph Wright
wrote:
>
> The 'expiry date' in LaTeX2e was there for good reasons, and reflected a
> desire to avoid buggy and out-of-date software remaining 'in use' for
> too long. However, the situation has changed more recently, as updates
> to LaTeX2e have bec
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Joseph Wright
> wrote:
>
>>
>> The 'expiry date' in LaTeX2e was there for good reasons, and reflected a
>> desire to avoid buggy and out-of-date software remaining 'in use' for
>> too long. However, the situa
Chris Travers wrote:
xetex -ini -jobname=xelatex -progname=xelatex -etex xelatex.ini
I asked Vafa, there was no reply. I will now ask you, Chris :
What does this accomplish that
> xetex -ini -etex xelatex.ini
does not ?
Philip Taylor
--
On Oct 19, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
> ...
> I think "stable" in terms of "you can safely use this to render your
> documents" and "stable" in terms of "no unnecessary changed so we know
> the software using this clearly and predictably works every time" are
> different senses of the
Am Wed, 19 Oct 2011 07:15:56 -0700 schrieb Chris Travers:
> Just for the record, my workaround is:
>
> cd to appropriate directory in /usr/var/texmf/
> xetex -ini -jobname=xelatex -progname=xelatex -etex xelatex.ini
>
> I can document it. It will do the job.
Hm. I don't understand how thi
Am 19.10.2011 um 16:09 schrieb Chris Travers:
> However, it seems
> to me that this community here doesn't really care about the kinds of
> environments where this sort of document processing occurs.
Or this community knows how to get back to functioning state. Or uses test or
development areas
Am 19.10.2011 um 16:21 schrieb Herbert Schulz:
> I don't think packages in updated TeX Live installations are changed
> arbitrarily but rather in response to bug fixes that others, and possibly not
> all users, have observed.
Indeed! Usually new (possibly bugful) features enter stage when a ne
Peter,
I sort of resent this message, since
a) To uninstall TeX Live, use the Finder’s GO menu, go to
/usr/local/texlive/2011
and drag it to the trash, inputting your admin password when asked
b) As I have said countless times, MacTeX installs TeX Live. Pure an
Yes, they have a mapping for their legacy Hebrew fonts, but I was hoping
to find a mapping for the ascii input used by hebtex, or arabtex.
I am not a scholar of Hebrew, so I would not be the right person to
write such a map file.
Nathan
On 11/10/18 5:48, Andy Lin wrote:
An easy way is to
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 02:23:29PM -0500, Neal Delmonico wrote:
> One thing still
> bothers me about that whole affair. I am working on several books
> involving Sanskrit and English and requiring hyphenation in both.
> None of the other books had
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 05:49:28AM +0800, Daniel Greenhoe wrote:
> Does anyone know of any data base
> with a traditional to simplified character mapping such that I could
> maybe write the utility myself?
Unicode has that in the Unihan database: look up Uniha
> Hm. I don't understand how this can be a general usable work-around.
> What actually is the "appropriate" directory here? Do you have a
> newer/local version of latex.ltx in this directory?
Actually, if you look at a latex.ltx that has that check (the one from
stock TeX Live 2011 still has co
2011/10/19 Arthur Reutenauer :
>> Hm. I don't understand how this can be a general usable work-around.
>> What actually is the "appropriate" directory here? Do you have a
>> newer/local version of latex.ltx in this directory?
>
> Actually, if you look at a latex.ltx that has that check (the one fr
Peter Dyballa,
I replied to Will Adam's comment as soon as I read it, apologizing to you.
Then I incorrectly the reply to Will rather than to the list.
I'm not going to reply to (or even read) mailing lists the rest of today.
Dick Koch
On Oct 19, 2011, at 8:35 AM, Richard Koch wrote:
> Peter,
Hi Arthur,
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Arthur Reutenauer
wrote:
> Unicode has that in the Unihan database:
> look up Unihan_Variants.txt in Unihan.zip
> (latest version http://www.unicode.org/Public/6.1.0/ucd/Unihan-6.1.0d1.zip )
It looks like I can extract everything I need from Unihan_V
28 matches
Mail list logo
