[4658] in SIPB bug reports
Re: Athena 7.7 and LaTeX
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (yandros@MIT.EDU)
Tue Jun 28 16:14:30 1994
From: yandros@MIT.EDU
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 1994 16:13:47 +0500
To: dot@MIT.EDU
Cc: bert@MIT.EDU, bug-sipb@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9406281751.AA03376@pianoforte.MIT.EDU> (message from Dorothy Bowe on Tue, 28 Jun 1994 13:51:45 EDT)
[bug-sipb people: this is a crossover from testers. If it's not clear
what is going on and you'd like to know, ask me.]
Well, I'll be the first to admit that some of my dotfiles go 'way back
to when I had no clue, but I had this value for TEXINPUTS:
.:/mit/sipb/lib/tex/macros:/usr/athena/lib/tex/macros
With that, I tried to latex some old files I had around, and couldn't
find article.sty -- the link in the sipb pointed to the wrong place, and
I didn't have ...athena/lib/tex/macros/latex in my path as it didn't
exist before. In other words, anyone who has sipb in their path before
the new macros/latex subdirectory will lose.
Yeah, I realized looking around last night tht this would be the case.
Possible solutions:
1. create another set of symlinks in a seperate directory and begin
migrating to the new ref.
2. remove the symlinks, since people should be including
'/usr/athena/lib/tex/macros' in $TEXINPUTS anyway
3. let it be broken for testing and update it later when bert installs
the new new (newer than the release; the beta stuff) [la]tex in
sipb.
4. remove [la]tex from sipb and point people at either newtek or
the release instead (at least until someone is ready to install the
new new [la]tex).
I like option 4. I dislike option 1. I could deal with either 2 or
3, with a preference for 3 over 2.
People should send me (and bert and bug-sipb but not testers)
opinions. People on testers who want to follow the rest of the
discussion should look at bloom-picayune:/usr/spool/discuss/bug-sipb.
I'll take action next week, after the Monday night meeting (which
could mean `Tuesday'). Convince me. :-)
chad
