[tex-live] amsfonts again

[Staszek Wawrykiewicz]

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Karl Berry wrote:

>     base font package: cm + lm + amsfonts (complete)
> 
> Hans's underlying long-term goal is to get rid of all the overlapping CM
> variants except LM.
> 
> cmr10.tfm will still exist, of course, but the map files will download
> lmr10.pfb for it, with suitable remapping.
> 
> I'm not sure what I think about it; it's a big change, but it's hard to
> see how we're going to make progress otherwise.  And LM does include
> fixes to the character shapes blessed by Knuth.

Agreed, but this is a (long term?) goal, _after_ cleaning and correcting
the current mess.
  
>     2. the same is with amssymbols and euler from bakoma. Do we really need
>        that *old* and not so nice nowadays stuff. Such fonts are completely
>        different and pretty breaks all packaging concept.
> 
> What are the differences between Bakoma Euler and AMS Euler?

Some years ago Bakoma Euler were added (but not complete!) to fill
missing (in BSR/AMS version) design sizes. They look badly together, so
it is better to use scalling approach. 

But the main problem is that using automatic scripts we end up with 
packages which contains the stuff from different sources only because
they share the same directory names, like euler, the obscure mixture from
3 sources: fonts from AMS, Bakoma Euler, and additional package with 
euler.sty.
So my question is: can we remove Bakoma Euler from TL and merge euler.sty 
into amsfonts package? Any objection?

-- 
Staszek Wawrykiewicz
StaW at gust.org.pl