-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:21:26AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 01:18:07PM +1100, terryc wrote:
> > What is the simple procedure to install additional Tetex packages now?
> >
> > Been about 2000 sin
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 01:18:07PM +1100, terryc wrote:
> What is the simple procedure to install additional Tetex packages now?
>
> Been about 2000 since I used LaTeX a lot and I find that wrapfig is
> the way to wrap text around a figure these days, so I'd like to use it.
Bac
terryc wrote:
> What is the simple procedure to install additional Tetex packages now?
>
> Been about 2000 since I used LaTeX a lot and I find that wrapfig is
> the way to wrap text around a figure these days, so I'd like to use it.
>
> Is there any aptitude/apt-get equ
What is the simple procedure to install additional Tetex packages now?
Been about 2000 since I used LaTeX a lot and I find that wrapfig is
the way to wrap text around a figure these days, so I'd like to use it.
Is there any aptitude/apt-get equivalent and what was/is the
installation u
On 06 Aug 2003, Anthony Campbell wrote:
> Following a disaster with cleanlinks my tetex-base, tetex-bin, and
> tetex-extra are in a mess. According to dpkg -C they are half-installed
> and half-configured. I cannot either reinstall or remove.
>
> Can anyone suggest a safe method of rmoving these p
Following a disaster with cleanlinks my tetex-base, tetex-bin, and
tetex-extra are in a mess. According to dpkg -C they are half-installed
and half-configured. I cannot either reinstall or remove.
Can anyone suggest a safe method of rmoving these packages and
reinstalling them?
AC
--
[EMAIL PRO
Hi!
> I can't seem to get Debian's teTeX to work at all ("can't find default
> format file" from tex). But when I downloaded it direct from sunsite,
> it worked fine. Has anyone had a similar experience? I suppose I
> could include more (or any, actually) details if requested.
I had th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi
I had the same problem. It seems, that during installation, some of the
files in /etc/texmf get removed, but later packages depend on them. I
finally succeeded by installing the packages manualy with dpkg not with
select
1. base package
2. bin
3. extras
then
Ben Pfaff writes:
> I can't seem to get Debian's teTeX to work at all ("can't find default
> format file" from tex). But when I downloaded it direct from sunsite,
> it worked fine. Has anyone had a similar experience? I suppose I
> could include more (or any, actually) details if requested.
>
> I can't seem to get Debian's teTeX to work at all ("can't find default
> format file" from tex). But when I downloaded it direct from sunsite,
> it worked fine. Has anyone had a similar experience? I suppose I
> could include more (or any, actually) details if requested.
> --
> Ben Pfaff <
I can't seem to get Debian's teTeX to work at all ("can't find default
format file" from tex). But when I downloaded it direct from sunsite,
it worked fine. Has anyone had a similar experience? I suppose I
could include more (or any, actually) details if requested.
--
Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTE
Mark Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi all
> Why don't we reorganize TeX for debian as follows: get rid of unneccessary
> older TeX packages (which I understand are buggy) and replace them with
> teTeX. That is, we use teTeX as the basis for debian TeX stuff. Then we
> could "value add" t
On 21 Apr 1997, Paul Seelig wrote:
> > web2c-7.0 is the state of the art.
> Which in turn contains lots of improvements by Thomas Esser who does
> designe teTeX. The upcoming teTeX release will be based on web2c-7.0
> or later. So the development of teTeX and web2c are actually strongly
> related
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Dunham) writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Seelig) writes:
>
>> consider installing Debian. I suppose that teTeX is at the moment the
>> state of the art of all the Unix TeX distributions available.
>
> web2c-7.0 is the state of the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Seelig) writes:
> Actually i thought that teTeX was supposed to and is the solution for
> what you seem to recognize as Debian's confused TeX direction!? IMHO
> the fact that teTeX has become part of Debian is a major reason to
> consider installing Debian. I suppose that t
Paul Seelig writes:
> Mark Phillips writes:
>
> > I think it is in Debian's interest to think carefully about how to get
> > the best possible TeX distribution. I think for a lot of people, having
> > a great TeX distribution would be a major selling point for the
> > distribution. At the momen
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Phillips) writes:
> I think it is in Debian's interest to think carefully about how to get
> the best possible TeX distribution. I think for a lot of people, having
> a great TeX distribution would be a major selling point for the
>
> > Has anyone else tried NTeX at all? I have that installed here; I
> > chose it because it comes with more documentation than teTeX did. The
> > installer is Debian compatible; it even provides the right packages
> > for things that depend on them.
>
> AFAIR Debian came with NTeX before. I
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Schulze) writes:
> Anyway there should be sufficient documentation about LaTeX across
> the net. I just re-read the german lkurz alias LaTeX2e-Kurzbeschreibung.
> I'm sure that a similiar english document does exist, too.
>
Actual
On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> Has anyone else tried NTeX at all? I have that installed here; I
> chose it because it comes with more documentation than teTeX did. The
> installer is Debian compatible; it even provides the right packages
> for things that depend on them.
>
>
On Apr 17, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote
> Has anyone else tried NTeX at all? I have that installed here; I
> chose it because it comes with more documentation than teTeX did. The
> installer is Debian compatible; it even provides the right packages
> for things that depend on them.
AFAIR Debian cam
Andreas Tille writes:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Mark Phillips wrote:
>
> > I notice there are several teTeX packages available. Have many people
> > tried them? Are there any problems with the packages or are they
> > stable enough for me to install them and be confide
On Apr 17, Mark Phillips wrote
> I notice there are several teTeX packages available. Have many people
> tried them? Are there any problems with the packages or are they
> stable enough for me to install them and be confident things are
> going to work properly?
>
> Is the
On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Mark Phillips wrote:
> I notice there are several teTeX packages available. Have many people
> tried them? Are there any problems with the packages or are they
> stable enough for me to install them and be confident things are
> going to work properly?
While i
I notice there are several teTeX packages available. Have many people
tried them? Are there any problems with the packages or are they
stable enough for me to install them and be confident things are
going to work properly?
Is the teTeX distribution complete, or is it missing a few things
25 matches
Mail list logo
