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

Bug#93781: 93781 texdoc prefers compressed over uncompressed documents



From: Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de>
Subject: Bug#93781: 93781 texdoc prefers compressed over uncompressed documents
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 11:33:16 +0200

> > --- texk/kpathsea/tex-file.c.orig       Thu May  6 02:38:17 1999
> > +++ texk/kpathsea/tex-file.c    Thu May 24 17:15:22 2001
> > @@ -508,6 +508,8 @@
> >        break;
> >      case kpse_texdoc_format:
> >        INIT_FORMAT ("TeX system documentation", DEFAULT_TEXDOCS, TEXDOC_ENVS);
> > +#define TEXDOC_SUFFIXES ".dvi" ".dvi.gz" ".html" ".pdf" ".pdf.gz" ".ps" ".ps.gz" ".txt" ".txt.gz" "" 
> > +      SUFFIXES (TEXDOC_SUFFIXES);
> >        break;
> >      case kpse_texpool_format:
> >        INIT_FORMAT ("texpool", DEFAULT_TEXPOOL, TEXPOOL_ENVS);
> > ]
> > 
> Well, I prefer a more simple solution, which was discussed lately in
> debian-tetex-maint. Patch is attached and should fit to an
> tetex-build-tree made by dpkg-source -x . I dunno, if it is a good
> idea to construct TEXDOCEXT that way, but it is configurable anyway
> afterwards.

From: Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de>
Subject: Re: texdoc: Should it use TEXDOCEXT like plain teTeX 2?
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:34:14 +0200

> Still any comments about that? If not, I'll prepare a patch send it
> into #93781.

Is there a patch or not yet?  What is a consensu?
If there is any consensus I'd like to fix this too
with #199357.

Best regards,			2003-8-27(Wed)

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



Reply to: