On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 10:59:09 -0500 "David R. Morrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Version 2.0 of teTeX was released around 10 days ago, and there > have been Fink packages in the unstable tree since then. > Unfortunately, the source files for version 1.0 have now been > removed from the upstream site, so I need to move the 2.0 fink > packages to the stable tree as soon as possible. > > I would appreciate receiving testing reports about > tetex-texmf-2.0-3 (which has been in the unstable tree for a > while), and tetex-2.0-5/tetex-base-2.0-5 (a new revision was > just added to the unstable tree moments ago). Okay. I just upgraded to Jaguar (finally!), and installed tetex 2.0-5, tetex-base 2.0-5, tetex-shlibs 2.0-5, and tetex-texmf 2.0-3. So far, so good: I can make dvi's, ps's, and pdf's from my mostly simplistic tex's containing latex commands. I was happy to see ghostscript 8 instead of ghostscript 6, which brings me to a couple of questions: I just went to install pdftex; why does it require the much-older ghostscript 6? And what's the difference between "ghostscript6: Interpreter for PostScript and PDF, v6.01 (used with teTeX)" and "ghostscript6: Interpreter for PostScript and PDF, v6.01 (used with teTeX)"? I know that the former uses X and the latter doesn't; I'm specifically asking whether I'll notice any difference if all I do is run pdflatex. Thanks for all your hard work, Dan -- <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.tombstonezero.net/dan/> An omer is a tenth of an ephah. -- Exodus 16:36. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
