Could an TeXpert help us solved the problem mentionned previously in this thread, and eventually adopt passivetex (there is no obligation)? Thanks, Christophe On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 09:50:12AM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, christophe [iso-8859-15] barbé wrote: > > > With your 0.2 package I get (not a problem with your package I guess) : > > > > [...] > > > I go further but still unsuccessful. > > I have try to increase a hash size but without effect. > > I don't know if something is wrong or if I simply need to increase all > > sizes. > > > > Any idea ? > > > > None. Can any TeXpert help us out? > > -- > Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@debian.org> > It's a girl! See the pictures - http://www.braincells.com/shailaja/ > -- Christophe Barbé <christophe.barbe@ufies.org> GnuPG FingerPrint: E0F6 FADF 2A5C F072 6AF8 F67A 8F45 2F1E D72C B41E As every cat owner knows, nobody owns a cat. --Ellen Perry Berkeley
Attachment:
pgpyVR1XCBKlv.pgp
Description: PGP signature