Re: CVS frank tetex-base: complete the renaming by removing old named files (now 10tetex-base.cfg)
Florent Rougon <f.rougon@free.fr> wrote:
> Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> wrote:
>
>> The parts that really map font names to files, yes. The first part with
>> the options for dvips and friends is still called 00updmap.cfg (but see
>> below).
>
> OK.
>
>> Yes, the 00updmap.cfg part is now in tex-common. I'm unsure about two
>> things:
>>
>> - it might be better from a practical point of view to change the name
>> from 00updmap.cfg to something else.
>
> You mean, give it a name that sounds close to tex-common?
Yes, and to make clear that the scope of the contents has changed.
>> On the other hand, the file is
>> already under ucf control, and we'll have to do some clever parsing of
>> the old file, anyway.
>
> I wouldn't mind a renaming of the file but I don't find the current name
> too bad. After all, it contains the base of an updmap.cfg file. So, I am
> not sure it is not worth the trouble of renaming it.
Well, I was just contemplating. I'll have harder things to do, and more
interesting ones, too.
> The check was there before I touched update-updmap. It is nothing
> essential and I have no problem removing it, but currently, it looks
> more useful than harmul to me, therfore I didn't remove it. But I might
> be wrong. :)
I never asked you to remove it :). I just wondered what the right thing
to check should be - after all, an updmap.cfg without any font mapping
is pretty useless, too, isn't it?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Reply to: