[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [pdftex] Re: BOUNCE address@hidden: Non-member submission from ["

From: Sebastian Rahtz
Subject: Re: [pdftex] Re: BOUNCE address@hidden: Non-member submission from ["Derek R. Price" <address@hidden>]
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:06:14 +0000

Derek R. Price writes:
 > Basically, the issue is that the GNU coding standards state that the
 > texinfo.tex you built your docs with should be included with a source
 > distribution so that an end user is sure to be able to build your docs too.

you could try telling the automake people to get real.. oh dear they
are cc-ed..... :-}

 > barbarically renaming the files before calling texi2dvi.
 > Aesthetically, I think coding the filename switch inside the *texi
 > source file would be most pleasing

sure, you can test the existence of the macro \pdfoutput in the
source, and \input a different file depending on whether or not
\pdfoutput exists

 > switch, and being able to specify a complete path to a *texinfo.tex
 > on the command line would be second best since it would avoid the
 > forced creation of extra directories.
you could do that too

 tex '\def\FOO{whatever/path}\input thisfile'

where thisfile.tex uses \FOO

 > Of course, a local structure mirroring the texmf tree structure
 > which allowed KPATHSEA to do most of the work without changes might
 > be the most elegant. 
yes, that would be possible too, redefining TEXMFLOCAL for the

  > Is any of this possible?

all of it. even better, forget the gnu coding standards while they
persist with something as horrible as texinfo......:-}

was that enough smilies to make sure Richard Stallman still sends me a
christmas card?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]