Re: Future of xmltex?
Hi Hilmar, hi all,
On Mi, 07 Jan 2009, Hilmar Preusse wrote:
> xmltex which belong to upstream. Upstream however seems to be dead
> (files in ftp://ftp.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/macros/xmltex/base/ have a
> age of 9 years). AFAICT context is able to process/format XML files
> too.
Well, age is not a criterium in the TeX world. Maybe we can shop around
in RedHat or somewhere else and see what they are shipping, and what are
the diffs.
> Question: do we really still need xmltex or is it obsolete? The only
> package depending on it is docbookwiki.
???
$ apt-cache rdepends xmltex
xmltex
Reverse Depends:
docbookwiki
xmlto
xml-resume-library
texlive-full
and thus much more problematic:
$ apt-cache rdepends xmlto
xmlto
Reverse Depends:
docbookwiki
xml-resume-library
kernel-package
asciidoc
and kernel-package is quite common.
No, we cannot easily remove it for now...
better would be to see what is wrong. One of the posts on this thread
mentioned that on RedHat the chain is working. Does anyone have a RedHat
installed? Can we get the intermediate files as produced by redhat and
check for diffs? And the distributed files?
Best wishes
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> Vienna University of Technology
Debian Developer <preining@debian.org> Debian TeX Group
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SLUMBAY (n.)
The cigarette end someone discovers in the mouthful of lager they have
just swigged from a can at the end of party.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff
Reply to: