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

Re: Out-of-Date LaTeX in Woody

From: "C.M. Connelly" <cmc@debian.org>
Subject: Out-of-Date LaTeX in Woody
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 12:43:21 -0700

> Am I right in thinking that, at this point, we will be shipping an
> out-of-date LaTeX distribution that's going to spew ``LaTeX too
> old'' errors for anyone doing a fresh install?

I would like to state only the followings.

I checked the difference between latex.ltx of 1999/12/01 and
that of 2000/06/01 and found that

@@ -513,17 +513,17 @@
 !  You are attempting to make a LaTeX format from a source file^^J%
-!  That is more than one year old.^^J%
+!  That is more than two years old.^^J%
 !  If you enter <return> to scroll past this message then the format^^J%
 !  will be built, but please consider obtaining newer source files^^J%
 !  before continuing to build LaTeX.^^J%
-!  LaTeX is re-issued every 6 months, in June and December.^^J%
+!  LaTeX is re-issued every year in June.^^J%
    \errhelp{To avoid this error message, obtain new LaTeX sources.}

that is, ``LaTeX too old'' error will be disappered in the
near future because (even?) Debian will be versioned up
within two years.

Perhaps many of us already know this but this might be
good news for us so I wish to point it out.

But the problem remains in woody if we do nothing at all...

> Is there anything we can do about that?   I know Thomas Esser
> isn't planning a new release of teTeX proper until the end of the
> year (waiting on a new web2c release), but is there any way that
> we could convince him to update the LaTeX stuff in a beta, and
> only update the tetex-base and tetex-extra packages?
> Failing that, we could use Giuseppe Ghibo's updates (at
> CTAN:/tex-archive/systems/linux/teTeX/current/contrib/ghibo/).
> And, failing that, we could do our own update.

Although I already pointed out this, I maintained the latest 
LaTeX as an latex-cur for Debian JP and, of course, I installed 
it in my every Debian system so I have never met ``LaTeX too old''

It does not overwrite any files of tetex-base and if one
removes it, I believe, the original tetex will be back again.

I guess this kind of update and update restricted only for 
woody (because as I pointed out, after woody, there will be
no LaTeX too old problem) might be best, IMHO.

> I'm concerned that we're going to be shipping teTeX packages that
> people are going to perceive as being ``broken'' right out of the
> box.  It looks like Red Hat is in the same boat, but I'd rather be
> on the ship or even the shore....


Furthermore, at least theoretically, Japanese pTeX/pLaTeX
etc. are declared to be based on the latest LaTeX, i.e. 
LaTeX 2000/06/01 at present so the current status of tetex
packages is a bit unsatisfactory for me...

Best regards,			 2001.9.21

 Debian Developer & Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
 Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@debian.org>
 Department of Math., Tokushima Univ.

Reply to: