Re: The road to dropping xdvik
On 28 January 2010 01:16, Matthew Saltzman <mjs(a)clemson.edu> wrote:
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 01:47 +0200, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 23:08 +0000, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> > 2010/1/27 Orion Poplawski <orion(a)cora.nwra.com>:
> > > I suspect a lot of our users will be similarly annoyed. This is one of
> > > those kinds of tools that "just works" and so people stick with
it.
> >
> > Well.. perhaps. OTOH people seem to have happily migrated from xpdf to
> > evince over time (or at least that's my perception).
>
> What do you mean?
>
> # yum -y install xpdf
> (clip)
> ---> Package xpdf.x86_64 1:3.02-15.fc12 set to be updated
>
> xpdf is still there, so actually nothing brutal has yet happened in the
> case of xpdf. When xpdf *is* removed I'd expect cries of rage.
Indeed, there are several features of xpdf that evince doesn't yet
support. Until it does, it turns out to be useless with emacs-auctex,
for one thing.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=451210
Well, evince may actually be useable from the auctex perspective at
this point. Also, auctex upstream has a new backend for dealing with
file viewing which will also make it easier to integrate with
xdg-open/evince/okular