Norbert, Thank you for your prompt response.
>> $ /usr/bin/xdvi --version >> xdvik version 22.84.16 j1.41-ptexlive (Xaw toolkit) >> Libraries: kpathsea version 6.1.0, T1lib version 5.1.2, FreeType version >> 2.4.9 >> $ > > I am not sure which xdvi you are using, but this one is not > what we ship in texlive, which is: > $ xdvik version 22.85 (Xaw toolkit) > Libraries: kpathsea version 6.1.1dev, T1lib version 5.1.2 > > With this version I don't see this problem. > > > I guess you are using xdvik-ja one, so assigning it there. That's possible . . . but I wonder how one can find out? I had done this before submitting my report: $ dpkg -L xdvik-ja | grep /usr/bin/xdvi $ dpkg -L texlive-binaries | grep /usr/bin/xdvi /usr/bin/xdvi-xaw /usr/bin/xdvipdfmx /usr/bin/xdvi $ \ls -lF /usr/bin/xdvi -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1863 Nov 19 16:08 /usr/bin/xdvi* $ /usr/bin/xdvi is not a symbolic link. The executable must have been installed by an official Debian package. As the above output shows, the xdvik-ja package doesn't include the executable /usr/bin/xdvi but texlive-binaries does. So, the executable must be from texlive-binaries. . . . Apparently this logic is somehow wrong. Can xdvik-ja replace /usr/bin/xdvi ? But, in that case, shouldn't it use Debian's "alternative" system? Why doesn't the package xdvik-ja create a symlink to /etc/alternative/* ? Regards, Ryo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
