[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Is this a bug?
- To: Sebastian Rahtz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: Is this a bug?
- From: Rebecca and Rowland <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 22:41:39 +0100
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- In-Reply-To: <8263-Fri05Jun1998152828firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org><3576B569.8316DB6F@cs.depaul.edu> <email@example.com>
At 3:28 pm +0100 5/6/98, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>Rebecca and Rowland writes:
> > (If you're using OzTeX, you can increase any of TeX's memory parameters by
> > changing the appropriate number in the config file; I set mem_top and
> > mem_max to 400000 and it seems happy. No need to ensure you've got a
>just like Unix web2c, then
Only if you've got the right version. I know: let's stop bickering and get
on with something sensible like counting the number of flying pigs we can
see. I've just spotted one behind me.
> > particular version of anything; vptovf and pltotf are big enough too. Just
> > to have a pointless dig at Sebastian: why you lot insist on using that
> > awkward-to-use Unix beats me.)
>i find it hard to believe that Andrew has made the sizes in vptovf
>dynamic. you probably just haven't hit one of the pathologically kerned
I think I might have; he's not made the sizes dynamic, just very big as far
as I know. Earlier versions of OzTeX's vptovf and pltotf *did* choke on
> > Firstly, that fontinst seemed to be running something like 1/5 of the speed
> > I'd seen previously. Have the recent modifications slowed it down, or
> > should I look for another cause?
>its age. fontinst was at its peak at the same time as Gascoigne.
Bamber, or Paul?
> years of
>alcohol abuse and associating with low lifes.
Ah. I see. Damn. I suppose I'd better start saving for a new computer
then. Any donations to the Rowland McDonnell G3 PowerMac fund accepted