Re: dvipdfm

[Christoph Martin <martin@uni-mainz.de>]

Julian Gilbey writes:
 > On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 11:34:48AM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
 > > Greetings!  I just submitted a dvipdfm package, with a diversion of
 > > the dvipdfm.defs file in the tetex latex tree, when I found in the
 > > packaging manual that I should consult with you first!  Sorry for the
 > > oversight -- this is my first 'diversion'.  So is this OK?  It really
 > > doesn't seem appropriate to use an alternative, as tetex has no binary
 > > of dvipdf?, and dvipdfm needs this file to work properly.
 > 
 > Is the dvipdfm.defs file in the tetex packages adequate?  If it's not
 > needed by any of the tetex binaries, perhaps the tetex packages should
 > just remove the file, and your package should say:
 > 

Lets ask the upstream author what he intends to to with this file and
if it is ok to remove his version in our teTeX version without
breaking anthing.

Thomas?

Christoph