Subject: Re: texinfo files
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 09/25/1998 20:58:43
[ On Fri, September 25, 1998 at 20:18:46 (-0400), Todd Vierling wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: texinfo files
> src/gnu/dist/gcc/f/... FORTRAN was at least anticipated, even if it was a
> while away, since BSD had it Way Back When.
> Same with netiso, etc.; we _want_ to put reliable stuff in tree to support
> it. The low popularity of these types of things has probably been a
> contributing factor to why we've sat around doing nothing with them. ;)
> On the other hand, I don't see us _ever_ putting TeX in the tree.
Perhaps not, and I'm not asking that it be done either, but so long as
NetBSD sources come with texinfo documentation it should be next to
trivial for someone to install whatever TeX package they wish into the
base system and be able to typeset those documents into one of their
intended final forms.
If this means having a dummy "tex" script in /usr/bin, then that should
be a perfectly acceptable alternative. Such a script could first try to
exec another "tex" elsewhere in the path, but if it can't it prints
something to the effect of:
You need to install TeX to typeset texinfo, LaTeX, and similar
forms of documents. One way you can do this by downloading and
installing the teTeX package from the main NetBSD distribution
site. Please read the file found at the following URL for
Texi2dvi would then be fully functional, but it just wouldn't always do
what the user hoped it might.
Complicating this process by even the one tiny step of requiring a user
first (re)install the *full* GNU texinfo package will only confirm the
suspicions of all those folks who claim NetBSD is too finicky and only
for experts, and off they'll go to join the Linux or FreeBSD crowds.
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <firstname.lastname@example.org> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>