> Dear Norbert, dear Frank! Thank you for your comments on my suggestion. > Thanks a lot for the comments, but wouldn't it be better if you would > have contacted me as the cm-super maintainer directly? Sorry. > > the new cm-super package from a Debian repository will have teTeX 3.0 > I think Frank is completely right here. It is really straight-forward > and easy: > tetex2/woody: use pts-tetex-cm-super, the old package > tetex3/etch+: use cm-super > I thought about incorporating tetex2 compatibility, but it showed as > useless. > Currently sarge is stable where you can use pts-tetex-cm-super. Okay, I understand. pts-tetex-cm-super does not work on stable without changes though. > One final question to Klaus: What is the problem you try to solve? > Is it: > - run stable=sarge with tetex2 and new cm-super fonts? > - make a package that can be used everywhere under the same name? > - ...? The whole story: The original pts-tetex-cm-super package does not work on stable, because it does not use the update-updmap scheme. Therefore, I once converted the package to use it. This was in times before cm-super was included in testing. Recently I contacted the CTAN package maintainer and asked if he wanted to include my changes. He wanted the package to work on any tetex version, but I didn't know if that was the right thing to do and how exactly to do it, so I wanted to consult the experts, i.e. you. Right then I noticed the new cm-super package in testing. And I was wondering if (i) I could help improving the cm-super package and (ii) learn from your implementation. I think I'll just use tetex 3 and the new cm-super, then everything is solved. One final question: What do you think of my other idea, to blank the archive to save disk space, e.g. by :> cm-super.t1c after installation? All the best, Klaus
Attachment:
pgpWmHr6vfgHV.pgp
Description: PGP signature