Re: Some other issues with tetex 3
Rogério Brito wrote:
> I have been switching back and forth between tetex (2) provided in sarge
> and tetex 3 (from experimental).
> I would really like to use tetex 3 or anything current (like something
> that offers memoir out of the box, for instance), but I discovered that
> there is a problem with passivetex and tetex 3.
> I don't remember right now what the problem was (my intention was to
> start writing documentation in XML for some packages and, of course, get
> nice output when typeset with TeX and friends), but it was something
> like the postint script of passivetex bombing when installing it.
> Has anybody seen this? I'm slightly bandwidth deprived right now and I'm
> back to tetex 2 (I need to use it for some real work). Is it desired to
> file a bug to, say, passivetex?
I just tried installing passivetex on my sargge system with the teTeX
backport. What failed was the installation of xmltex, which passivetex
depends on. AFAICT the problem is that the postinst script looks for the
format files with extension .efmt when (pdf)eTeX has been used. However,
the distinction between .fmt and .efmt files has been dropped in teTeX 3
and other TeX dsitributions, since now pdfeTeX is used for allmost
everything. Hence I think a bug to xmltex telling the maintainers that
their package will have problems when teTeX 3.0 is upploded to unstable
sounds right. I guess, though, that this problem has been considered
together with the general issue of upploading teTeX 3.0 to unstable.