missing stubs in latest release
Hi Hans!
I am packaging up the latest context release for Debian, and have some
questions before releasing it:
- luatools and mtxtools is missing from scripts/context/unix/stubs, is
this by intention or by error?
- the debian packages ship additional stubs for:
pdftrimwhite texfind texshow
which are missing in the above dir, should/could/would you add them?
- besides an additional
Recommends: luatex
do you think that other changes to packaging is necessary? (Not that
you have to know the internals, this is only a question about some
major incompatibilities I didn't find on the Wiki...)
- does it make sense to package it now or wait for some more iterations?
Thanks a lot and all the best
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining
Norbert Preining wrote:
Hi Hans!
I am packaging up the latest context release for Debian, and have some questions before releasing it: - luatools and mtxtools is missing from scripts/context/unix/stubs, is this by intention or by error?
the problem is that some want stubs, some want symlinks ... if you like stubs more (my preference btw), then send me the ones as you like them and i will include them
- the debian packages ship additional stubs for: pdftrimwhite texfind texshow which are missing in the above dir, should/could/would you add them?
no real reason, texfind/texshow depend on tk as well, and pdftrimwhite is for karl (uses it for tugboat) and he know how to call it
- besides an additional Recommends: luatex do you think that other changes to packaging is necessary? (Not that you have to know the internals, this is only a question about some major incompatibilities I didn't find on the Wiki...)
if texlua and texluac are available then no lua is needed; mkiv needs lm opentype and texgyre opentype (used as defaults) so maybe make sure that texgyre is installed the biggest thing is the cache dir but the defaults should ok; if luatools --verbose --generate luatools --verbose --make --compile cont-en works ok, then things should be ok; btw, luatools --make --compile plain should also work and gives a plain that can read from zip files and such (later i will add open type font support)
- does it make sense to package it now or wait for some more iterations?
well, we need to start sometime i guess and since your work is the base for texlive best get things sorted out asap thanks, Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Die, 14 Aug 2007, Hans Hagen wrote:
stubs more (my preference btw), then send me the ones as you like them and i will include them
Will do.
if texlua and texluac are available then no lua is needed; mkiv needs lm
texluac?? texlua I know, what is texluac, also a link to luatex?
opentype and texgyre opentype (used as defaults) so maybe make sure that texgyre is installed
Ok, will check. Thanks a lot.
Best wishes
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining
Norbert Preining wrote:
texluac?? texlua I know, what is texluac, also a link to luatex?
indeed, it acts as luac, the lua bytecode compiled ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Hans, On Die, 14 Aug 2007, Hans Hagen wrote:
opentype and texgyre opentype (used as defaults) so maybe make sure that texgyre is installed
another question: so *PER DEFAULT* you need
Opentype TeX Gyre
fonts? If yes, then this is a real problem, from the texlive tpm2deb.cfg
file:
# GYRE fonts have a very strange license ...
blacklist;tpm;tex-gyre;*
yes, they are blacklisted for now. I don't want to restart a discussion
here, I guess you have heard about this already.
Furthermore, I am not sure whether the tex-gyre fonts as shipped in TeX
Live also contain the OpenType version.
So we have 2 options for Debian:
- package the tex-gyre fonts independently, and see whether it passes
ftp-masters. I am not sure about that due to the licensing wishywashy.
After this make context available.
or
- make context use the lmodern fonts
Isn't there any chance that by default context uses the lmodern fonts?
They are wide spread, packaged, easily available, stable.
Is there a reason why you switches from the lm fonts (to which you have
switched also recently) to the gyre ones?
Best wishes
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining
Norbert Preining wrote:
Isn't there any chance that by default context uses the lmodern fonts? They are wide spread, packaged, easily available, stable.
they do, what i meant was that when users swhitch to say palatino, then pagella is expected and not whatever-it's-called-in-berry-speak so why not make tex gyre a non free package, i'm sure no one bothers -) Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Die, 14 Aug 2007, Hans Hagen wrote:
Isn't there any chance that by default context uses the lmodern fonts? They are wide spread, packaged, easily available, stable.
they do, what i meant was that when users swhitch to say palatino, then pagella is expected and not whatever-it's-called-in-berry-speak
Ahhh, that is good. Perfect. Thanks for the clearing this misunderstanding.
so why not make tex gyre a non free package, i'm sure no one bothers -)
Well, the problem currently is that some of us (not necessary me)
consider the licensing not a "non-free", but a "not-licensing" because
it violates the rights of urw++... anyway, time will show ...
Again, thanks, I hope that I can upload a package next week.
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining
Hi Martin! On Die, 14 Aug 2007, Martin Schröder wrote:
consider the licensing not a "non-free", but a "not-licensing" because it violates the rights of urw++... anyway, time will show ...
Has anyone bothered to ask urw++?
I said that I don't want to start this here, but as you asked: urw++
released the fonts under gplv2. I agree that this is not the best (to be
polite) license for fonts, but they did, and that was nice.
but well, the gyre fonts are under the gust font license, which creates the
following problem: are the gyre fonts derived work or not? If yes, they
must be gpl, too.
I know that urw++ will probably NOT go to court for this anyway, but
still there is a problem.
If someone has a good contact to urw++ and could ask them to
relicense/double-license the fonts to gust fl or gpl/gfl, that would be
fantastic ... but who could it be???
The problem is that neither the original authors of the GYre fonts nor
the representatives of the user groups see this problem as a problem ...
Best wishes
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining
2007/8/14, Norbert Preining
but well, the gyre fonts are under the gust font license, which creates the following problem: are the gyre fonts derived work or not? If yes, they must be gpl, too.
We've both seen the presentation by the Gyre guys @ EuroBachoTeX2007: It's derived, but wastly improved, so it probably passes the threshold of originality. Still, one should ask urw++. Or we get a ruling by the FSF that the GUST licenses is GPL compatible (which is unlikely). Best Martin
Martin Schröder wrote:
2007/8/14, Norbert Preining
: but well, the gyre fonts are under the gust font license, which creates the following problem: are the gyre fonts derived work or not? If yes, they must be gpl, too.
We've both seen the presentation by the Gyre guys @ EuroBachoTeX2007: It's derived, but wastly improved, so it probably passes the threshold of originality. Still, one should ask urw++. Or we get a ruling by the FSF that the GUST licenses is GPL compatible (which is unlikely).
well, i expect a new licence war soon anyway (the gpl 3 stuff) -) Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
Norbert Preining wrote:
Well, the problem currently is that some of us (not necessary me) consider the licensing not a "non-free", but a "not-licensing" because it violates the rights of urw++... anyway, time will show ...
indeed; btw, i think they wanted to contact urw so ... Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Hans, On Die, 14 Aug 2007, Hans Hagen wrote:
the problem is that some want stubs, some want symlinks ... if you like stubs more (my preference btw), then send me the ones as you like them and i will include them
Great, attached they are. mtxtools and luatools are taken from the context in april, the others I have written, texmfstart needed a stub but I never saw it included anywhere.
no real reason, texfind/texshow depend on tk as well, and pdftrimwhite is for karl (uses it for tugboat) and he know how to call it
and for me, it is useful ;-)
Best wishes
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining
participants (3)
-
Hans Hagen
-
Martin Schröder
-
Norbert Preining