Bug#234539: graphic[sx] should recognize .pdftex as a PDF picture file
Hi Josselin, hi Roland, hi debian-tetex-maint,
Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> schrieb:
> Package: tetex-base
> Version: 2.0.2-5.1
> Severity: normal
> Tags: upstream patch
>
> The graphics/graphicx package should recognize .pdftex pictures when the
> pdftex backend is used. These pictures are generated by XFig as part of
> the combined PDF/LaTeX format. See attached patch.
Hm. I don't like this idea too much, for several reasons:
- when I read the extension .pdftex, the first thing I think of is an
input file for pdfTeX, as opposed to TeX. Indeed I would use just this
extension if I had to automatically create input files for both TeX
and pdfTeX from the same source (e.g. from a database) and process
them automatically (e.g. by putting them into a directory where a cron
job would pick them up and feed them to the right binary via
\input). Therefore I don't feel well with using .pdftex for an output
file.
- If we add this extension for XFig, next month we find that some other
application uses .pdflatex or .pdfout or .pdfpic for their PDF output,
and we would have to add these extensions as well.
- There are for sure other applications that use the extension to
recognize a file (I don't use any graphical filemanagers, but do they
really use magic?). This would have to be patched, too.
- I would like to keep the number of debian-specific patches as small as
possible. But since pdfTeX is also used on WinDOS systems where the
extension is the only established means of determining a file type, I
severely doubt that upstream would be willing to adopt your patch (and
the following ones for .pdflatex and .pdfout\dots).
I would prefer if XFig just would name the PDF output file *.pdf, as
usual. Roland, is there any specific reason why this isn't done, or is
it just because that's how it's ever been?
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel
Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
Reply to: