Mon, 18 Sep 95 10:07 EDT
> -- One must not use texmf/tex// as search path, due to duplicate
> files. TEXINPUTS must be set for each format anew. (There may be
> reasonable defaults, but eventually that's the bottom line.)
> [Paul Vojta]
I do not understand what the problem is. Or, are there systems where
setting up different search paths are difficult? Or, is the problem
that this is not yet properly explained in the current draft?
> -- PK files not generated by MF go in
> [Joachim & Karl]
Hm... No supplier/typeface part? Another thing: I do not like that
the files of the same type (e.g. .pk files) are stored at different
directory levels. If you compare
fonts/pk/cx/public/cm/dpi300/cmr10.pk # 6 dir. levels
fonts/pk/modeless/gsftopk/dpi300/ptmr8r.pk # 5 dir. levels
fonts/pk/modeless/gsftopk/adobe/times/dpi300/ptmr8r.pk # 7 dir. levels
then the modeless are always off by one...
I do not like the extra modeless directory...
> -- Where are binaries placed?
> o Non-Unix folks don't like bin/<platform>/.
And UNIX folks do not like fonts/type ... :-) In my opinion, binaries
info pages and manpages should be keep out of the draft. Maybe a
recommendation where to put them, but it should be clear that these
could be outside the texmf tree, too.
> -- It must be made more explicit that format, base, & pool files are
> placed in the <TeX implementation> tree. It's in the draft, but
> this is the most FAQ, the wording must therefore be improved.
I absolutely agree..
> -- An appendix should be added that outlines known structures of <TeX
> implementation> trees. It must be made explicit that this
> structure is for a specific version, is not fixed, and may change
> in the next version; it's just for informational purposes (to see
> what `others' have done).
Yes, I like that, too.