Re: texmf.cnf again
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2003 08:24:38 +0200, Marcelo E Magallon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> My point is that given the way the question is written, its
>> priority and default answer seem to counter its purpose.
> Given that were the defaults set differently this would be a
> serious bug, perhaps that says something about the purpose.
"tex configuration is broken for frontend=noninteractive" isn't
Can't update-texmf store the information whether /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf
was generated by it or is user-modified in the file itself (for
example by keeping an md5sum in the first line) and do the right