RE: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

RE: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Robinow, David]

Could be. Microsoft routinely includes important system
updates with IE, thus forcing people to download it.
 If this keeps up they could run Netscape out of business.
Somebody should take them to court.

-----Original Message-----
From: Markus Hoenicka [mailto:Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu]
Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes:
 > Strange, we haven't had any complaints.  It seemst that MiKTeX
 > installs and runs flawlessly.  Note that, of course, MiKTeX is
 > packaged in a tarball and installed through setup.exe.  Maybe our
 > Windows users are all using that latest software?
Is it really only me running WinNT without IE > 2?


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Robert Collins]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan Nieuwenhuizen" <janneke@gnu.org>


> Having a broken package that doesn't get fixed by it's maintainer is
> arguably worse than having none at all.  Maybe Cygwin should introduce
> something like Debian's Non-maintainer uploads to address this
problem?

NMU's require a consistent and self documenting package management
system - which we do not have today. Once we have that, then I've no
problem with this concept.

Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Markus Hoenicka]

The texmf tree is a tar.gz file available at every CTAN server which
includes all but the binary files for a teTeX system. This is
platform-independent, as these are only text files.

With the new dependence stuff in setup it *could* be made a separate
package. I have no idea about licensing issues, though.

regards,
Markus

Robert Collins writes:
 > Jerome, oh Jerrrrooooome, care to comment on either including the texmf
 > tree (whatever that is) or does it require adding a new pacakge?
 > 
 > And if it needs a new package - do you want to do that, or is it up for
 > grabs?

-- 
Markus Hoenicka, PhD
UT Houston Medical School
Dept. of Integrative Biology and Pharmacology
6431 Fannin MSB4.114
Houston, TX 77030
(713) 500-6313, -7477
(713) 500-7444 (fax)
Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Robert Collins]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerome BENOIT" <520066587150-0001@t-online.de>


>
>
> Markus Hoenicka wrote:
> >
> > The texmf tree is a tar.gz file available at every CTAN server which
> > includes all but the binary files for a teTeX system. This is
> > platform-independent, as these are only text files.
> >
> > With the new dependence stuff in setup it *could* be made a separate
> > package. I have no idea about licensing issues, though.
>
> I have nothing to add.

Unless I'm mistaken, you are the current Textex-beta maintainer. So you need
to decide whether you will add this texmf stuff to tetex-beta, or whether a
new package that contains it is needed. (I supect a new package makes sense
if the texmf stuff doesn't change every time you compile the binaries).

If a new package - you don't need to be the texmf package maintainer, but
you can be if you want to.

Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Charles Wilson <cwilson@ece.gatech.edu> writes:

> Okay, now this sounds like lilypond is using a modified *cygwin*
> setup.exe. 

Yes.  There was a moratorium on packages, so to get cygwin's setup.exe
to download and install the precompiled lilypond tarball (and guile,
and an out-of-the-box-working tex), there was no choice but use a
modified version.

> Does lilypond distribute it's own version of MiKTeX, using the cygwin
> setup.exe to do the installation (of the custom MikTeX, and the lilypond
> stuff)? 

Yes, indeed, that's it.  I think there have been attempts to fix
tetex-beta, to work right out of the box, but up till now, no-one has
successfully done this and contributed it.  So, we continue to include
miktex...

> Geez.  I started out trying to clarify the issue, and ended up confusing
> myself.

:-)

Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Charles Wilson]

Markus Hoenicka wrote:
> 
> Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes:
>  > http://lilypond.org/wiki/?TroubleshootingWindows).  We currently use
>  > and distribute MikTeX, because it works reliable, and right out of the
>  > box.
> 
> You can't even install MiKTeX unless you run the latest Windows or the
> latest Internet Explorer.

Are you saying MikTeX only works on WXP?  WRONG.  I've run MikTeX 2.1 on
W98, WNT, W2K (and have no reason to assume it won't work under WMe.) 
Now, I'm not arguing against tetex, but let's confine the arguments to
factual ones, not FUD.

Are you saying MikTeX only works with IE6.0?  Again, WRONG. I've used
MikTeX with IE5.0, 5.5, 5.5sp1, and 5.5sp2.  If you wish to keep your
IE4, then you can download the appropriate DLLs that enable the setup
engine separately -- details given at the MikTeX website.

Again, stick to facts, not FUD.

> 
>  >  But I'd much rather we could use tetex.  Using MikTeX from
>  > cygwin is `cygpath hell'.

I guess.  I've never had many problems.  I use MikTeX + cygwin + make
all the time, and rarely have to resort to cygpath (of course, I usually
build using only relative directories, so D:\\ vs. /cygdrive/d isn't
really an issue for me)

There are arguments in favor of tetex over MikTeX, but the "latest
Windows" or "latest IE" are not among them.

--Chuck

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Jerome BENOIT]

Markus Hoenicka wrote:
> 
> The texmf tree is a tar.gz file available at every CTAN server which
> includes all but the binary files for a teTeX system. This is
> platform-independent, as these are only text files.
> 
> With the new dependence stuff in setup it *could* be made a separate
> package. I have no idea about licensing issues, though.

I have nothing to add.

Best wishes,
Jerome BENOIT



> 
> regards,
> Markus
> 
> Robert Collins writes:
>  > Jerome, oh Jerrrrooooome, care to comment on either including the texmf
>  > tree (whatever that is) or does it require adding a new pacakge?
>  >
>  > And if it needs a new package - do you want to do that, or is it up for
>  > grabs?
> 
> --
> Markus Hoenicka, PhD
> UT Houston Medical School
> Dept. of Integrative Biology and Pharmacology
> 6431 Fannin MSB4.114
> Houston, TX 77030
> (713) 500-6313, -7477
> (713) 500-7444 (fax)
> Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

-- 
  *º¤., ¸¸,.¤º*¨¨¨*¤    Jerome BENOIT, Ph.D.    *º¤., ¸¸,.¤º*¨¨¨*¤
                  Institute of Molecular Biology
               Friedrich-Schiller University of Jena
             Winzerlaer Strasse 10, Jena 07745, Germany
  *º¤., ¸¸,.¤º*¨¨¨*¤    JGMBenoit@wanadoo.fr    *º¤., ¸¸,.¤º*¨¨¨*¤

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Robert Collins]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary R Van Sickle" <tiberius@braemarinc.com>
> Just something to keep in mind here: the texmf .tar.gz is somewhere on the
> order of 30MB.  wget sucks it down quite adequately over a modem or
1/2ISDN
> here in the good ol' US of A, but rarely without a few restartable
retries.
> Until Cygwin's setup gets such functionality, my guess is it would
probably
> cause more grief than it cures to add it as a package, just due to its
size.

That sounds like a good reason to have it as a separate package to the
binaries. Once such a package is mirrored, you can download it quite happily
from your nearest mirror.

As for setup... patches welcome :].

Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Markus Hoenicka]

Charles Wilson writes:
 > > You can't even install MiKTeX unless you run the latest Windows or the
 > > latest Internet Explorer.
 > 
 > Are you saying MikTeX only works on WXP?  WRONG.  I've run MikTeX 2.1 on
 > W98, WNT, W2K (and have no reason to assume it won't work under WMe.) 
 > Now, I'm not arguing against tetex, but let's confine the arguments to
 > factual ones, not FUD.
 > 
 > Are you saying MikTeX only works with IE6.0?  Again, WRONG. I've used
 > MikTeX with IE5.0, 5.5, 5.5sp1, and 5.5sp2.  If you wish to keep your
 > IE4, then you can download the appropriate DLLs that enable the setup
 > engine separately -- details given at the MikTeX website.
 > 
 > Again, stick to facts, not FUD.
 > 

Ok, "latest" was a bit of an exaggeration. Fact is that the MiKTeX
installer needs versions of Windows DLLs which are *not* in e.g. a
WinNT4 installation up to Service Pack 5 (the latest that I've
installed). I bet it won't work on Win95 either. The MiKTeX maintainer
used to distribute these DLLs but he does so no more. You wrongly
assume that everyone happily uses Internet Explorer, so this is not a
reasonable path to provide the missing DLLs. So on an older Windows
system *without* Internet Explorer MiKTeX will not install. Period.

(Please excuse my rants about MiKTeX. IMHO it is bad software design
to couple a widely ported software like TeX to the Windows/IE update
spiral by means of the installation software. The Cygwin and fpTeX
installers show that this is not necessary)

regards,
Markus

-- 
Markus Hoenicka, PhD
UT Houston Medical School
Dept. of Integrative Biology and Pharmacology
6431 Fannin MSB4.114
Houston, TX 77030
(713) 500-6313, -7477
(713) 500-7444 (fax)
Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Markus Hoenicka]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes:
 > http://lilypond.org/wiki/?TroubleshootingWindows).  We currently use
 > and distribute MikTeX, because it works reliable, and right out of the
 > box.

You can't even install MiKTeX unless you run the latest Windows or the
latest Internet Explorer.

 >  But I'd much rather we could use tetex.  Using MikTeX from
 > cygwin is `cygpath hell'.

I have instructions about installing a SGML system on Windows which
also uses TeX for the printable output:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/cygbook1.html

I provide a very simple shell script (for SGML->PS/PDF
transformations) that takes care of the 'cygpath hell'. It is not that
hard. It used to work for MiKTeX and works now for fpTeX and for
Cygwin teTeX (and even for TeX on Unix platforms).

 > 
 > > Please try to provide useful bug reports. "Is broke, please
 > > fix" does not count as useful, IMHO.
 > 
 > Tetex-beta, as installed by setup.exe (v1.3.5) fails the first simple
 > LaTeX test:
 > 
 >     tineke@DOOS ~$ latex sample2e
 >     This is TeX, Version 3.14159 (Web2C 7.3.3)
 >     I can't find the format file `latex.fmt'!
 >     tineke@DOOS $ uname -a
 >     CYGWIN_98-4.10 DOOS 1.3.5(0.47/3/2) 2001-11-13 23:16 i586 unknown
 > 

Did you install the teTeX texmf tree? Just installing Tetex-beta is
not enough, as explained by the Tetex-beta readme. This was also
discussed on this list right after the first release of this
package.

regards,
Markus

-- 
Markus Hoenicka, PhD
UT Houston Medical School
Dept. of Integrative Biology and Pharmacology
6431 Fannin MSB4.114
Houston, TX 77030
(713) 500-6313, -7477
(713) 500-7444 (fax)
Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Gary R Van Sickle]

Markus Hoenicka wrote:

> Ok, "latest" was a bit of an exaggeration. Fact is that the MiKTeX
> installer needs versions of Windows DLLs which are *not* in e.g. a
> WinNT4 installation up to Service Pack 5 (the latest that I've
> installed).

Is there some reason you can't install SP 6a?  I don't know if that would
have what you need either, but still, why go slumming any more than you have
to?

> I bet it won't work on Win95 either.

Maybe not.  Probably not on Win3.1 either.  Or 3.0.  Or DOS.

With all due respect friend, 1995 *was* approximately six years ago.

> The MiKTeX maintainer
> used to distribute these DLLs but he does so no more.

It's likely not legal for him to do so, depending on the particular DLLs in
question.

> You wrongly
> assume that everyone happily uses Internet Explorer, so this is not a
> reasonable path to provide the missing DLLs.

Well, you wrongly assume that just because you have Internet Explorer
installed that you're forced to use it, happily or otherwise.  You aren't.

> So on an older Windows
> system *without* Internet Explorer MiKTeX will not install. Period.
>

Ok, so install IE then.  Or get a newer version of Windows.  Problem solved,
no?

Or hey, better yet, install a 'real OS' like Linux that you'll *never* have
to update!  Never did quite understand how exactly that worked....

> (Please excuse my rants about MiKTeX. IMHO it is bad software design
> to couple a widely ported software like TeX to the Windows/IE update
> spiral by means of the installation software. The Cygwin and fpTeX
> installers show that this is not necessary)

Neither work on Windows 3.1.  Or DOS.  I don't see how that then qualifies
as 'bad software design'.

Don't get me wrong Markus, I'm a far cry from Bill's biggest fan, and I'm
(trying to) use Cygwin's teTeX myself, but I don't think you're thinking is
entirely clear here.  You're using Cygwin right?  Hence Windows?  Hence
you've chosen to get on that "Windows/IE update spiral"?  I don't
understand; you'd prefer that Windows was the same now as it was in 1995?
Why not the same as it was in the even-worse-old-days of 3.1?  Or 3.0?  Or
2.0?  Or DOS?  Time marches on, and not just in Windows-land: what was Linux
looking like back in '95?  Will a '95-vintage Linux installation build and
run teTeX?

Jeez, now you got me ranting ;-).  Sorry folks.

Gary R. Van Sickle
Braemar Inc.
11481 Rupp Dr.
Burnsville, MN 55337


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Markus Hoenicka <Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu> writes:

> Did you install the teTeX texmf tree? Just installing Tetex-beta is
> not enough, as explained by the Tetex-beta readme.

This is exacly why I asked if there was any chance if this would get
fixed (.. is not enough), or if tetex-beta would be removed or marked
experimental again with this lifted package moratorium new strictness.

It would be Very Good (TM), if installing a package (and its
dependencies, eg, tetex-texmf) would be `enough' for the package to
work.  This is what Debian and Red Hat packages do, usually.

Having a broken package that doesn't get fixed by it's maintainer is
arguably worse than having none at all.  Maybe Cygwin should introduce
something like Debian's Non-maintainer uploads to address this problem?

Greetings,
Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Markus Hoenicka <Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu> writes:

> You can't even install MiKTeX unless you run the latest Windows or the
> latest Internet Explorer.

Strange, we haven't had any complaints.  It seemst that MiKTeX
installs and runs flawlessly.  Note that, of course, MiKTeX is
packaged in a tarball and installed through setup.exe.  Maybe our
Windows users are all using that latest software?

> I have instructions about installing a SGML system on Windows which
> also uses TeX for the printable output:
> 
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/cygbook1.html

Thanks, but I don't think that would do.  Currently, windows users run
setup.exe, and they get a working LilyPond environment.  We get lots
of questions and complaints if it doesn't work that way.  Even if
there are simple, step by step, instructions on what to do after
running setup.exe.

> I provide a very simple shell script (for SGML->PS/PDF
> transformations) that takes care of the 'cygpath hell'. It is not
> that hard.

Yes, we distribute shell scripts too, that cygpath the tex/mf
environment settings.  But this is all rather ugly.  mktextfm and such
don't really work, when triggered from the kpathsea lib.

> It used to work for MiKTeX and works now for fpTeX and for
> Cygwin teTeX (and even for TeX on Unix platforms).

Ah, but then you know how difficult it can be to write or debug a
texmf.conf, and why you don't want users that haven't ever heard of
TeX or environment variables (or tar for that matter) to even have to
touch a tex installation?  (Unless you live from giving support,
perhaps :-)

> Did you install the teTeX texmf tree?

No, I installed tetex-beta, that's all the tetex that setup.exe will
install, right?  That's why we still have to distribute and maitain
our own, modified setup.exe and repository (apart from the just lifted
package moratorium).

> Just installing Tetex-beta is not enough, as explained by the
> Tetex-beta readme.

Yes, I know.  That's why we can't use it.  Users in general won't read
READMEs, let alone they would be able to follow simple instructions
:-(

The fact that there's a README with instructions, instead of an
additional tetex package, for example, tells me that there is some
intelligent user-interaction required.

Greetings,
Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Robert Collins]

>  > > Just installing Tetex-beta is not enough, as explained by the
>  > > Tetex-beta readme.
>  >
>  > Yes, I know.  That's why we can't use it.  Users in general won't
read
>  > READMEs, let alone they would be able to follow simple instructions
>  > :-(
>  >
>  > The fact that there's a README with instructions, instead of an
>  > additional tetex package, for example, tells me that there is some
>  > intelligent user-interaction required.

Agreed. If there is missing files/a missing package then that needs to
be addressed in setup/the packages. having a README and user interaction
isn't always a bad thing, but in this case it sounds like it is.

...
> copy of the teTeX texmf tree is made part of the distribution. Would
> that be possible?

Jerome, oh Jerrrrooooome, care to comment on either including the texmf
tree (whatever that is) or does it require adding a new pacakge?

And if it needs a new package - do you want to do that, or is it up for
grabs?

Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Markus Hoenicka]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes:
 > Strange, we haven't had any complaints.  It seemst that MiKTeX
 > installs and runs flawlessly.  Note that, of course, MiKTeX is
 > packaged in a tarball and installed through setup.exe.  Maybe our
 > Windows users are all using that latest software?

Is it really only me running WinNT without IE > 2?

 > > Did you install the teTeX texmf tree?
 > 
 > No, I installed tetex-beta, that's all the tetex that setup.exe will
 > install, right?  That's why we still have to distribute and maitain
 > our own, modified setup.exe and repository (apart from the just lifted
 > package moratorium).
 > 
 > > Just installing Tetex-beta is not enough, as explained by the
 > > Tetex-beta readme.
 > 
 > Yes, I know.  That's why we can't use it.  Users in general won't read
 > READMEs, let alone they would be able to follow simple instructions
 > :-(
 > 
 > The fact that there's a README with instructions, instead of an
 > additional tetex package, for example, tells me that there is some
 > intelligent user-interaction required.
 > 

Now I see. We're talking about semi-intelligent end-users ;-/ I see no
easy way how Cygwin setup.exe could provide a full TeX system unless a
copy of the teTeX texmf tree is made part of the distribution. Would
that be possible?

regards,
Markus

-- 
Markus Hoenicka, PhD
UT Houston Medical School
Dept. of Integrative Biology and Pharmacology
6431 Fannin MSB4.114
Houston, TX 77030
(713) 500-6313, -7477
(713) 500-7444 (fax)
Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Markus Hoenicka]

Gary R Van Sickle writes:
 > Ok, so install IE then.  Or get a newer version of Windows.  Problem solved,
 > no?
 > 

When I hit my thumb with a hammer I can get some aspirin, put a
bandage on it, and later get plastic surgery to make the thumb look
like a human thumb again. Or I avoid hitting my thumb with a hammer.

The solution is not to buy a new Windows or to use IE, but to use
Cygwin TeX or fpTeX instead.

 > Or hey, better yet, install a 'real OS' like Linux that you'll *never* have
 > to update!  Never did quite understand how exactly that worked....
 > 

Tell me about it. I run Debian at home. I'd run Debian right here if
my IT people would support this.

 > > (Please excuse my rants about MiKTeX. IMHO it is bad software design
 > > to couple a widely ported software like TeX to the Windows/IE update
 > > spiral by means of the installation software. The Cygwin and fpTeX
 > > installers show that this is not necessary)
 > 
 > Neither work on Windows 3.1.  Or DOS.  I don't see how that then qualifies
 > as 'bad software design'.
 > 

Cygwin claims proudly on its homepage that it runs on every Win32
version except WinCE. This is good software design because it will
install on the very Windows box that you happen to have.

MikTeX is lousy software design because it hides TeX, which would also
run on any Win32 version (except maybe WinCE), behind an installer
that needs software components available only in a part of all Win32
installations. It is especially lousy because there is no technical
reason to do so. The MiKTeX installer does *nothing* that the fpTeX
installer or Cygwin setup.exe couldn't do. And the latter work with
every Win32 version (except WinCE, of course).

 > Don't get me wrong Markus, I'm a far cry from Bill's biggest fan, and I'm
 > (trying to) use Cygwin's teTeX myself, but I don't think you're thinking is
 > entirely clear here.  You're using Cygwin right?  Hence Windows?  Hence
 > you've chosen to get on that "Windows/IE update spiral"?  I don't
 > understand; you'd prefer that Windows was the same now as it was in 1995?
 > Why not the same as it was in the even-worse-old-days of 3.1?  Or 3.0?  Or
 > 2.0?  Or DOS?  Time marches on, and not just in Windows-land: what was Linux
 > looking like back in '95?  Will a '95-vintage Linux installation build and
 > run teTeX?
 > 

My perspective may be skewed, but I work in a department of
approx. 100 people in Medical School, UT Houston. We have as many
computers, with maybe 10 Macs, leaving 90 Windows boxes. Approx. 70 of
these run WinNT, 10 or so Win95. Only those that were bought more or
less recently run Win2000 or XP. Our IT department is not supposed to
update our boxes just because Windows is so much fancier these
days. As long as we can punch in our data, these boxes will run
WinNT. And due to tons of virus problems with IE, the default browser
is still Netscape 4.7. You have to keep conservative environments like
these in mind when you tell everyone how easy it is to just buy a new
Windows and pull a new IE every other month.

 > Jeez, now you got me ranting ;-).  Sorry folks.
 > 
Has to be once in a while.

regards,
Markus

-- 
Markus Hoenicka, PhD
UT Houston Medical School
Dept. of Integrative Biology and Pharmacology
6431 Fannin MSB4.114
Houston, TX 77030
(713) 500-6313, -7477
(713) 500-7444 (fax)
Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Gary R Van Sickle]

Robert Collins wrote:

> From: "Jerome BENOIT" <520066587150-0001@t-online.de>
> >
> >
> > Markus Hoenicka wrote:
> > >
> > > The texmf tree is a tar.gz file available at every CTAN server which
> > > includes all but the binary files for a teTeX system. This is
> > > platform-independent, as these are only text files.
> > >
> > > With the new dependence stuff in setup it *could* be made a separate
> > > package. I have no idea about licensing issues, though.
> >
> > I have nothing to add.
>
> Unless I'm mistaken, you are the current Textex-beta maintainer. So you
need
> to decide whether you will add this texmf stuff to tetex-beta, or whether
a
> new package that contains it is needed. (I supect a new package makes
sense
> if the texmf stuff doesn't change every time you compile the binaries).

Just something to keep in mind here: the texmf .tar.gz is somewhere on the
order of 30MB.  wget sucks it down quite adequately over a modem or 1/2ISDN
here in the good ol' US of A, but rarely without a few restartable retries.
Until Cygwin's setup gets such functionality, my guess is it would probably
cause more grief than it cures to add it as a package, just due to its size.

Gary R. Van Sickle
Braemar Inc.
11481 Rupp Dr.
Burnsville, MN 55337


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

[Charles Wilson]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> 
> Markus Hoenicka <Markus.Hoenicka@uth.tmc.edu> writes:
> 
> > You can't even install MiKTeX unless you run the latest Windows or the
> > latest Internet Explorer.
> 
> Strange, we haven't had any complaints.  It seemst that MiKTeX
> installs and runs flawlessly.  Note that, of course, MiKTeX is
> packaged in a tarball and installed through setup.exe.

Note to cygwin folks: MikTeX has it's own setup.exe, based on a
completely different codebase.  (BTW, I thought MikTeX and its packages
were packaged as .cab files, not tarballs -- .tgz.  I guess I always
associate "tarball" with "tar was used to create")

[see note below]

> Maybe our
> Windows users are all using that latest software?
> 
> > I have instructions about installing a SGML system on Windows which
> > also uses TeX for the printable output:
> >
> > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hoenicka_markus/cygbook1.html
> 
> Thanks, but I don't think that would do.  Currently, windows users run
> setup.exe, and they get a working LilyPond environment.  We get lots
> of questions and complaints if it doesn't work that way.  Even if
> there are simple, step by step, instructions on what to do after
> running setup.exe.

Again, the MikTeX setup is not the cygwin setup.

[see note below]

> No, I installed tetex-beta, that's all the tetex that setup.exe will
> install, right?  That's why we still have to distribute and maitain
> our own, modified setup.exe and repository (apart from the just lifted
> package moratorium).

Okay, now this sounds like lilypond is using a modified *cygwin*
setup.exe. 

Does lilypond distribute it's own version of MiKTeX, using the cygwin
setup.exe to do the installation (of the custom MikTeX, and the lilypond
stuff)? 

Geez.  I started out trying to clarify the issue, and ended up confusing
myself.

:-P

--Chuck

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/