Bug#263410: map files
On 30.09.04 Frank K?ster (frank@debian.org) wrote:
> Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> wrote:
Hi,
> >> > Can you give an example and/or an explanation on what to do with
> >> > the map files?
>
> I had to find out myself in the dvips manual:
>
[< vs. <<.]
One of the german font gurus was last year in Darmstadt and held a
lecture about that topic. So I know about that.
> This can be achieved on an all-or-none basis with the -j0 switch to
> dvips, and probably similarly for pdftex/dvipdfm, but on a
> per-font-basis it can only be changed in the map files, it seems.
>
I guess so. And I guess too, that only in rare case one want include
a font fully and another one only partially.
> > For this point you could downgrade this bug to wishlist. I can't
> > imagine any reason, why one would like to include the whole font
> > into an PS/PDF file. However, the fact that this is configurable
> > in the map file makes me think that map file are config files and
> > hence should sit in /etc.
>
> On the one hand, I am not completely convinced - for many man files
> in a TEXMF tree one can imagine some circumstances where changing
> it to effect a "local customization" is "needed".
>
One could argue, that these files are config files but are only to be
changed in rare cases. Hence it is acceptable for the user to
install a modif. version in localtexmf if we'd like to.
I guess, we should contact our local TeX gurus about that.
> Are we going to put hyphenation patterns below /etc, or color.pro
> or t1enc.def?
>
Well changing these files gives you different optical output, on
machines which should be equal from this point of view.
> Suggestion: If we put map files below /etc/, then they should go
> into /etc/texmf/maps, or something like that.
>
Exactly! Thomas has changed the fs layout and should mirror it below
/etc if we've decided to do so.
H.
--
sigmentation fault
Reply to: