Re: tetex-beta nitpicking [WAS: Re: no more package moratorium?]

["Gary R Van Sickle" <tiberius at braemarinc dot com>]

Markus Hoenicka wrote:

> Ok, "latest" was a bit of an exaggeration. Fact is that the MiKTeX
> installer needs versions of Windows DLLs which are *not* in e.g. a
> WinNT4 installation up to Service Pack 5 (the latest that I've
> installed).

Is there some reason you can't install SP 6a?  I don't know if that would
have what you need either, but still, why go slumming any more than you have
to?

> I bet it won't work on Win95 either.

Maybe not.  Probably not on Win3.1 either.  Or 3.0.  Or DOS.

With all due respect friend, 1995 *was* approximately six years ago.

> The MiKTeX maintainer
> used to distribute these DLLs but he does so no more.

It's likely not legal for him to do so, depending on the particular DLLs in
question.

> You wrongly
> assume that everyone happily uses Internet Explorer, so this is not a
> reasonable path to provide the missing DLLs.

Well, you wrongly assume that just because you have Internet Explorer
installed that you're forced to use it, happily or otherwise.  You aren't.

> So on an older Windows
> system *without* Internet Explorer MiKTeX will not install. Period.
>

Ok, so install IE then.  Or get a newer version of Windows.  Problem solved,
no?

Or hey, better yet, install a 'real OS' like Linux that you'll *never* have
to update!  Never did quite understand how exactly that worked....

> (Please excuse my rants about MiKTeX. IMHO it is bad software design
> to couple a widely ported software like TeX to the Windows/IE update
> spiral by means of the installation software. The Cygwin and fpTeX
> installers show that this is not necessary)

Neither work on Windows 3.1.  Or DOS.  I don't see how that then qualifies
as 'bad software design'.

Don't get me wrong Markus, I'm a far cry from Bill's biggest fan, and I'm
(trying to) use Cygwin's teTeX myself, but I don't think you're thinking is
entirely clear here.  You're using Cygwin right?  Hence Windows?  Hence
you've chosen to get on that "Windows/IE update spiral"?  I don't
understand; you'd prefer that Windows was the same now as it was in 1995?
Why not the same as it was in the even-worse-old-days of 3.1?  Or 3.0?  Or
2.0?  Or DOS?  Time marches on, and not just in Windows-land: what was Linux
looking like back in '95?  Will a '95-vintage Linux installation build and
run teTeX?

Jeez, now you got me ranting ;-).  Sorry folks.

Gary R. Van Sickle
Braemar Inc.
11481 Rupp Dr.
Burnsville, MN 55337


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/