[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Configuration file shadowed?

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 21:54:50 +0200, Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> said: 

> Steve Greenland <steveg@moregruel.net> wrote:
>> On 21-Jul-06, 13:41 (CDT), Jean-Christophe Dubacq <Jean-Christophe.Dubacq@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
>>> The way I see it, the /usr/share/texmf/mktex.cnf is a "default
>>> value file", used in the setup of the whole texmf hierarchy; the
>>> configuration is /etc/texmf/mktex.cnf, which, per web2c magic,
>>> overrides the default values, _if it does exist_. Good default
>>> values can be set by copying /usr/share/texmf/mktex.cnf, and
>>> return to default values can be done through the removal of
>>> /etc/texmf/mktex.cnf.
>> I'd buy that except for the debconf message, which implies that the
>> visibility of certain default value (MT_FEATURES, right?) blocked
>> by the mere existence of /etc/texmf/mktex.cnf, even though it's
>> unmentioned in that file.

> Indeed, the TeX Policy needs rewording, and this particular file
> should be a conffile, because it affects how the TeX programs and
> helper scripts act.  In general, files that influence documents and
> are read because they are somehow requested in TeX's input (or
> BibTeX's or whatever) make no sense in /etc.

        Yes, I agree: those are closer in sense to being library
 modules (\usepackage{foo} seems to indicate that foo.tex is a
 library-equivalent, not a configuration file)

Pecor's Health-Food Principle: Never eat rutabaga on any day of the
week that has a "y" in it.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: