[tex-live] map file / new path settings

Thomas Esser te at dbs.uni-hannover.de
Sat Jan 24 21:28:19 CET 2004

> no, it's more that i (wildly) guess that users put their tex file in a 
> local place or tree, while tex related font files are placed in the tree by 
> programs; so i expect less problems with tex files than with the lesser 
> known files (that are magically produced by utilities and so)

On the other hand, much more people add texinput related stuff to their
TeX system than font related stuff; I don't think that you can make a
point here.

> get me right, i agree with you on making things simple; i only want to make 
> sure that for some time old things keep working; most users kno wwhat to do 

Again, you are argueing about time. I don't think that the situation in
a year is significantly different as far as the knowledge/information
level of TeX users are concerned if we keep the paths compatible.

On the other hand, if we allow only *one* place, people will quickly adopt
to this.

> but how many fonts do you have in your tree system that are not part of 
> tetex?

Why does that matter? Or, do you want to say that I don't know what I am
talking about?


$ find /software/pay/fonts/ -name \*.pfb | wc
   2794    2794  109365

> i used them as an illustration of a change in the distribiution that broke 
> things; it also demonstrates that (and i fall into that trap more often 
> than i want) something that works here not need to work there (in that 
> respect it is already a miricle that te/fp/*tex work the way they do)

There are already systems out that follow the new directory scheme
introduced by tds 1.0, e.g. vtex. The idea of the tds is that all
distributions should follow. The sooner we make clear where the files
need to be put, the less trouble we will have.

> >macro level, but for me, this is no solution. I always suggest that my
> >users (be it teTeX or TeX Live) make their ps fonts known to updmap. That
> which has the danger of getting conflicts in the file since the current 
> naming scheme permits the same name for fonts (esp slanted and caps) which 

Well, that argument shows me that you don't know what updmap is
doing. That tool knows that pdftex has a problem and removes the psname
from those entries (which have ExtendFont / SlantFont; I don't know of
any problem with caps).

> hm, i wonder why people always think that i'm only aware of pdftex; i use 
> dvips in mp related trickery; and, dvipdfmx is quite well supported as 

Well, I was referring to what you have said before:
> > >(given this thread, i'm seriously considering to drop map files and define 
> > >map entries dynamically, since this is what pdftex can do nowadays, but i 

> so, to repeat myself: i have no problem with improvements in the tree, but 
> i do have problems with sudden changes in some areas; anyhow, i'll just 
> redirect questions that will arise to this list -)

Oh, I don't even have a problem if you direct those questions directly to me.


More information about the tex-live mailing list