Re: #debian-tetex is not exactly hopping....
Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp> writes:
> In practice, fmtversion of LaTeX in tetex package is 1999/12/01
> at present (of unstable!) and this contains potential problem
> causing errors that LaTeX is too old when one try to make
> fmt file based on LaTeX.
There has only been one LaTeX release since then... the differences
are available at http://www.latex-project.org/ltnews/ltnews13.html.
The major substantial changes are AMS-LaTeX 2.0 and the new PS-NFSS.
The new PS-NFSS requires a bunch of new support files (updated files
for font metrics, virtual fonts and font definitions) which make it a
more complex upgrade than normal.
The new AMS-LaTeX can be downloaded and installed easily by oneself,
so I don't think it's a very compelling argument for including the new
LaTeX.
In general, I think that the LaTeX community is conservative enough
that we can wait for the upstream on this. (After all, the next LaTeX
revision will be dated June 2001, and with the yearly release
schedule, we might actually _see_ it sometime in the next few months.)
There are people still using 1996 LaTeX, and someone who both knows
the benefits of the latest LaTeX and cares about them can either
install it themselves, or is already using a teTeX beta or TL6 (beta?
I don't know offhand). I don't know if TUGBoat is even using the
latest one yet... I think they're using TeX Live 5, which has
1999/12/01.
If you're interested in updated packages, I think the place to start
is pdftex, where snapshots come out more frequently, fix more bugs,
and in general have more user-noticable results.
--
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> - In a variety of flavors!
Oxymorons... "military intelligence" and "tech support"
Reply to: