On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 01:59:49PM +0000, Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2017-04-30, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 09:47:47PM +0000, Guenter Milde wrote: > >> On 2017-04-28, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > ... > > > After removing the old latin9.def file, the test > > > "doc/UserGuide_pdf5_texF" > > > is now passing, and I imagine the others. I will check tonight. > > > I am interested in making a bug report for the latex2html package. Do > > you agree that the latex2html package should not package latin9.def, > > neither old nor new? The package latex2html depends on the package > > texlive-latex-recommended which in turn depends on texlive-base, which > > contains latin9.def. Does that argument seem reasonable? > > It seems so. If not, they will tell you... > > Also, creating the "UbuntuPackages" symlink to a place that is *after* > the standard files in the TeX lookup path may prevent obsolete files masking > newer ones.
Good idea. I will look into doing that. Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
