Jason Chu a écrit : > I have no problem maintaining something more recent than tetex, > assuming it's backwards compatible. If we moved to TexLive, we'd > probably just make it replace tetex and be done with it. > > My understanding is that TexLive totally replaces tetex and there are > no regressions worth talking about. Is this correct? > > Jason > Yes texlive would totally replace tetex. However if we decide to make texlive packages for arch, it would be wise of course to place them in testing for a while... :-)
More specifically: The core of TeXLive is absolutely identical to teTeX --- initially the creator of TeXLive used teTeX as a base. However it offers extra binaries and a much larger choice of macros, fonts and utilities. Plus it is compiled for multiple platforms -- which does not interest us here, as we would only fetch the sources. As for backwards compatibility, this is certainly not a problem. Old documents still compile with a recent LaTeX installation, and it is straightforward to attach an existing system-wide local texmf tree or user-specific ones to the texlive installation. BTW one very seducing feature of the forthcoming TeXLive is that it will include XeTeX (http://scripts.sil.org/xetex), an extended TeX implementation with Unicode and OpenType support. It was originally developed for MacOSX but is available for Linux since June 2006. It is currently very actively developed and has a sizeable user community, but among Mac and Linux users. One enjoyable feature of XeTeX is that it frees you from the hassle of font installation, as it uses the fontconfig library to access the fonts installed on the system (but it can also use those present in the texmf tree). François _______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
