On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 10:56 -0700, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 12:28:58PM -0500, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
>
>
> It seems reasonable that anything in F9 should be more up to date than
> anything in F8 (see another post in this thread).
>
> tetex-xdvi-3.0-44.3.fc8
> xdvik-22.84.13-10.fc9
It is; but the main difference is that F8 packages provide 'tetex'
distribution while rawhide comes with 'texlive' (the later evolved
from and in continues a work carried for many years by Thomas Esser
with tetex). Right now you are seeing in rawhide a "transition
period" and from time to time something may tie itself in a knot
although in general thing looks really smooth with this. One of
issues is to provide a natural updgrade path - of course. OTOH
That's why I wanted to bring the issue to somebody's attention 8^).
mixing here packages from F8 and rawhide does not sound like a good
idea.
In this case, jnovy's F8 texlive repo isn't being updated. It was he
who suggested pulling the Rawhide versions. tetex is pretty old, now.
I'd like to use texlive , both for myself and to help test. But I can't
afford to run all Rawhide at this point.
Michal
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Mathematical Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs