(resending with correct From: which is subscribed) Thomas Esser wrote: [ about adding a switch to pdftex to use libpoppler instead of included xdpf code ]

...

...

The harder part is the autoconf magic required for the switching, and not even writing autoconf (at least not yet), but rather incorporating the changes:

On my system, "./reautoconf" does not work, instead complains:

autoconf: invalid option -m

Two options: 1) install autoconf-2.13 and use that 2) try the same in my current tree (available from rsync://tug.org/tetexdevsrc/). That tree is already converted to autoconf-2.5x.

Given the fact that Peter Breitenlohner has already worked out how to convert all packages that are part of teTeX (his work is now included in teTeX's new source tree), it should be fairly easy to make the same for the rest of TL, too. I honestly hope that the next version of TL will no longer use autoconf-2.13.

That's good news, and I think it would be best if I start with that. However, only if I'm sure that we will be able to incorporate this into the standalone pdftex tarball, and into texlive. Is there any documentation how Peter did it, and what needs to be done for simple updates? And are there any binaries in texlive that aren't in the teTeX tree and already converted? Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX)

Olaf Weber wrote:

The reautoconf script in the source tree should be running the hacked-up autoconf 2.13 that's also in the source tree.

It should, as in "it is supposed to", but it doesn't: frank@riesling:~/src/pdftex-1.40.0-beta-20060125/src$ head -4 reautoconf #!/bin/sh echo . autoconf -m texk/etc/autoconf executing "./reautoconf" just calls the autoconf that's in the path.

I don't _think_ you need autoconf 2.13 installed as well, but am not certain at this point. As Thomas points out, the autoconf mess should be resolved in the nearish future by 2.13 being abandoned.

As Thomas said, most of the work has already been done. Will this be ported to pdftex soon? Err, and who's going to do it? TIA, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX)

Frank Küster writes:

Olaf Weber wrote:

...

The reautoconf script in the source tree should be running the hacked-up autoconf 2.13 that's also in the source tree.

It should, as in "it is supposed to", but it doesn't:

frank@riesling:~/src/pdftex-1.40.0-beta-20060125/src$ head -4 reautoconf #!/bin/sh

echo . autoconf -m texk/etc/autoconf

executing "./reautoconf" just calls the autoconf that's in the path.

If this tree is derived from the texlive source tree, there might (should) be a reautoconf.texk in there.

...

I don't _think_ you need autoconf 2.13 installed as well, but am not certain at this point. As Thomas points out, the autoconf mess should be resolved in the nearish future by 2.13 being abandoned.

As Thomas said, most of the work has already been done. Will this be ported to pdftex soon? Err, and who's going to do it?

If it isn't fixed in the standalone pdftex tree, this kind of issue tends to be addressed when the pdftex changes are merged back into web2c or teTeX. -- Olaf Weber (This space left blank for technical reasons.)