Differences between stable and unstable tetex --- bugs?
I just thought I'd tell someone about some differences in tetex that I noticed the last few weeks, just in case they're not supposed to be there.
I write at home and at work using latex. At home I use debian unstable since I'm on an amd64 with very new hardware. At work and on my laptop I use debian stable.
A little while back, I started to notice two differences in documents compiled from the same code.
* Sometimes, the documents compiled on stable were a little longer than the ones compiled on unstable. This occurred in chapters where the multicol package was used, causing problems at tightly fitted chapter endings (the document would spill over to a new right-page).
* ps2pdf fails to translate the proper margins from a ps document on unstable.
The architecture at work and on my laptop is 386, while the unstable debian is on an amd64.
The documentclass in question is memoir.
I use this script produce a neat doublepage
pdf:
#! /bin/bash
latex $1.tex
dvips -t a5 $1.dvi -o $1.ps
psselect -p_,- $1.ps $1b.ps
psnup -2 -l -Pa5 $1b.ps $1c.ps ; ps2pdf $1c.ps $1.pdf
On stable, this results in a pdf that is identical to the *c.ps with proper margins. On unstable, the pdf version has the wrong right margin (too small) while the *c.ps is correct.
I'm sorry if I can't explain this any better --- I'm a scholar and not very technical. I just thought I'd tell someone in case this is caused by bugs and not a planned change in tetex. I'm not looking for support, since I can still use stable to get the job done properly. But it would be bad if my problems persisted in the next stable release. Without debian and tetex I'm lost :).
Best regards,
landhaj
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
Reply to: