Re: TeX Licenses & teTeX (Was: Re: forwarded message from Jeff Licquia)

[Boris Veytsman <borisv@lk.net>]

> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:50:32 -0400
> From: Glenn Maynard <g_deb@zewt.org>


> 
> He said "the package name gets changed".  The package name is "tetex",
> not "tex", so that's been done.  ("Package name" has a very specific
> meaning in Debian, and there is no "tex" package in Debian.)  The
> biggest change the description would need is s/TeX distribution/TeX-like
> distribution/.
> 

Please see below.

> You're claiming packaging the TeX software is in violation of the TeX
> trademark, and you present this as if it's a showstopper for his suggestion,
> when it's clear that the most you would have to do is a little work with
> sed.


I never claimed this. teTeX is a great distribution (AFAIK, Knuth now
uses this), and Thomas Esser did a great job to make it compliant.

This distribution rightly claims that TeX it distributes is TeX. Here
you are:

    boris@bilbo:~$ dpkg -S `which tex`
    tetex-bin: /usr/bin/tex
    boris@bilbo:~$ tex
    This is TeX, Version 3.14159 (Web2C 7.3.7)

As you see, while this package is called tetex-bin, it claims to
include TeX.

Note that etex, omega and pdftex do not make this claim:

    boris@bilbo:~$ etex
    This is e-TeX, Version 3.14159-2.1 (Web2C 7.3.7)

    boris@bilbo:~$ pdftex
    This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159-1.00a-pretest-20011114-ojmw (Web2C 7.3.7)

    boris@bilbo:~$ omega
    This is Omega, Version 3.14159--1.23 (Web2C 7.3.7)
    Copyright (c) 1994--2000 John Plaice and Yannis Haralambous

I said in my other mail that Debian *could* delete banner from tex and
say something like "This is deb-TeX". My argument is that this would
be of very limited use for the TeX users community. While this
community supported and supports new programs like etex, pdftex,
omega, etc, I do not think it would support a conscious effort in
deleteing the common reference point.


> 
> Okay, I'll be direct.
> 
> Fix your attitude and adjust your tone.  My tolerance for condescension
> and offensiveness has its limit.
> 


Sorry if I offended you. Should eat my dinner before replying. Sorry 

-- 
Good luck

-Boris

Evolution is a bankrupt speculative philosophy, not a scientific fact.
Only a spiritually bankrupt society could ever believe it. ... Only
atheists could accept this Satanic theory.
- Rev. Jimmy Swaggart, "The Pre-Adamic Creation and Evolution"