Re: texmf.cnf again
On Wed, 04 Jun 2003 15:18:35 +0200, Andreas Metzler <email@example.com> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2003 08:24:38 +0200, Marcelo E Magallon
>>> 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
TeX configuration overwrote uhand crafted user config file is
also a serious bug.
> 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 thing(TM)?
In other words, use ucf?
When you're dining out and you suspect something's wrong, you're
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C