fpTeX and ConTeXt...

fpTeX and ConTeXt...

[Magnus Lie Hetland]

Just a quick question: Why isn't texexec.rme copied/renamed/edited to
e.g. bin/win32/texexec.ini? In the default TeXLive distribution,
texexec won't work -- for me at least -- because there is no
texexec.ini file. But it seems that a default one could perhaps be
distributed so that things work out of the box?

--
Magnus Lie Hetland                                  The Anygui Project
http://hetland.org                                  http://anygui.org

Re: fpTeX and ConTeXt...

[Frans Goddijn]

On my setup texexec.ini is on
c:\TeXLive\texmf\context\perltk

> Just a quick question: Why isn't texexec.rme copied/renamed/edited to
> e.g. bin/win32/texexec.ini? In the default TeXLive distribution,
> texexec won't work -- for me at least -- because there is no
> texexec.ini file. But it seems that a default one could perhaps be
> distributed so that things work out of the box?

That would be great. The miracle of 4TEX was that it actually *worked* right
away (in most cases... :-)

Re: fpTeX and ConTeXt...

[Taco Hoekwater]

On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:57:35 +0100 "Frans Goddijn" <frans@goddijn.com> wrote:

> > Just a quick question: Why isn't texexec.rme copied/renamed/edited to
> > e.g. bin/win32/texexec.ini? In the default TeXLive distribution,
> > texexec won't work -- for me at least -- because there is no
> > texexec.ini file. But it seems that a default one could perhaps be
> > distributed so that things work out of the box?

Obviously, if there was an texexec.ini in the context zip file, it would
overwrite an already present version. Considering that a lot of people
install new context releases regularly, this does not sound like a good
idea to me. 

I believe texexec uses the texexec.rme if it can't find the .ini file,
but the supplied file is suitable for teTeX/fpTeX, not MikTeX. Correct, 
Hans?

-- 
groeten,

Taco

Re: fpTeX and ConTeXt...

[Hans Hagen]

At 10:12 AM 3/18/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:57:35 +0100 "Frans Goddijn" <frans@goddijn.com> wrote:
>
> > > Just a quick question: Why isn't texexec.rme copied/renamed/edited to
> > > e.g. bin/win32/texexec.ini? In the default TeXLive distribution,
> > > texexec won't work -- for me at least -- because there is no
> > > texexec.ini file. But it seems that a default one could perhaps be
> > > distributed so that things work out of the box?
>
>Obviously, if there was an texexec.ini in the context zip file, it would
>overwrite an already present version. Considering that a lot of people
>install new context releases regularly, this does not sound like a good
>idea to me.
>
>I believe texexec uses the texexec.rme if it can't find the .ini file,
>but the supplied file is suitable for teTeX/fpTeX, not MikTeX. Correct,
>Hans?

right, the copying is not really needed; miktex users must copy the file 
and set the miktex flag.

Hans

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE | pragma@wxs.nl
                       Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
  tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   fall-back web server: 
www.pragma-ade.nl
-------------------------------------------------------------------------