Re[2]: [NTG-context] Gamma support in TeXExec?

[Giuseppe Bilotta <gip.bilotta@iol.it>]

Monday, October 21, 2002 Olaf Weber wrote:

OW> Hans Hagen writes:
>> At 08:40 PM 10/20/2002 +0200, Olaf Weber wrote:
>>> Hans Hagen writes:

>>>> personally i think that gamma should just use a cont-* file, but with
>>>> an ofmt extension; where etex can be distinguished by suffix, omega
>>>> cannot, which is a bad thing since now one gets format clashes;

>>> This is an interesting idea, and one I'd be willing to impose on Omega.

>> Thanks! It would help a lot.

OW> Still, for my peace of mind I'd like to know a bit more of the
OW> background, and why getting Omega to use a different suffix will help
OW> so much.  (And does this mean that pdftex and pdfetex should be
OW> modified as well?)


e-TeX already uses the .efmt extension when running in extended
mode. The reason to use different extensions is to solve easily
the problem of re-naming formats when running with different
engines (pdfLaTeX vs Lamba vs eLaTeX vs LaTeX, for example). While
it may be interesting to find new names for old formats under new
engines, it's really unnecessary (for example ConTeXt has a
preliminary support for Omega as its engine; the ConTeXt format
built on Omega has to be called Gamma, or you can't have Knuth's
or pdf-TeX *and* Omega formats at the same time).

-- 
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta

_______________________________________________
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ref.ntg.nl
http://ref.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context