still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current - Slackware

This is a discussion on still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current - Slackware ; I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware. Slackware still use tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which recommend texlive). Also I still do not see the current version of emacs ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

  1. still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware. Slackware still use
    tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which
    recommend texlive). Also I still do not see the current version of emacs
    in current (and that you should not be a big deal to upgrade). What
    happens... what could we expect for the next version of Slackware?

    Olive

  2. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    On 2008-02-05, Olive wrote:
    > I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware. Slackware still use
    > tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which
    > recommend texlive). Also I still do not see the current version of emacs
    > in current (and that you should not be a big deal to upgrade). What
    > happens... what could we expect for the next version of Slackware?
    >
    > Olive


    As near as I can tell, most of the people here want everything but
    KDE to vanish.

    Tom

    --
    calhobbit (at)
    gmail [DOT] com

  3. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Olive wrote:

    > I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware. Slackware still use
    > tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which
    > recommend texlive). Also I still do not see the current version of emacs
    > in current (and that you should not be a big deal to upgrade). What
    > happens... what could we expect for the next version of Slackware?
    >
    > Olive


    Tell PV about your concerns.
    volkerdi@slackware.com

    --
    Old Man

    "Swagger isn't courage." Lee Iacocca

  4. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:51:41 +0000, Tom Newton wrote:

    > As near as I can tell, most of the people here want everything but
    > KDE to vanish.
    >
    > Tom


    That might be true, but I'll settle for you vanishing.


  5. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Tom Newton :
    > On 2008-02-05, Olive wrote:
    >> I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware. Slackware still use
    >> tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which
    >> recommend texlive). Also I still do not see the current version of emacs
    >> in current (and that you should not be a big deal to upgrade). What
    >> happens... what could we expect for the next version of Slackware?
    >>
    >> Olive

    >
    > As near as I can tell, most of the people here want everything but
    > KDE to vanish.
    >
    > Tom


    Really? I'm the polar opposite.

    --
    6802 hackers make great use of the SEX instruction.

    www.websterscafe.com

  6. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Olive wrote (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:40:48 +0100):

    > I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware. Slackware still use
    > tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which
    > recommend texlive). Also I still do not see the current version of emacs
    > in current (and that you should not be a big deal to upgrade). What
    > happens... what could we expect for the next version of Slackware?
    >
    > Olive


    I don't know about emacs, which I upgraded on my own, but there seems to
    exist some problem with TeXLive. This isuite huge, actually out of bounds
    for a distro like slack. And one needs a huge amount of knowledge to
    build a reasonable subset. Unfortunately, I think TeX is not PVs
    speciality. (Maybe I'm wrong, but we have always been lagging behind
    state of the art LaTeX).

    I was hoping for a comment by a resident latex and auctex guru ...

    Good luck
    Franz

  7. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Olive wrote:

    > What happens... what could we expect for the next version of
    > Slackware?


    Mayhap the question is rather *when* to can expect the next version of
    SlackwareŽ. See the thread Slackware Release Fun & Games to have your
    guess. As Franz Sauerzopf wrote one can always install the latest
    version of Emacs, the typesetting programmes seem to be more
    problematic but as Old Man wrote, let the man know of your concerns, or
    even offer to help.

    Surely however it is better to wait for him to have a stable version
    ready, than to worry that it has been about seven months since the
    release of 12.0? Is there really a need for SlackwareŽ 12.1/13.0 so
    soon?
    --
    Two Ravens
    "...hit the squirrel..."


  8. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Franz Sauerzopf writes:

    > Olive wrote (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:40:48 +0100):
    >
    >> I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware. Slackware still use
    >> tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which
    >> recommend texlive). Also I still do not see the current version of emacs
    >> in current (and that you should not be a big deal to upgrade). What
    >> happens... what could we expect for the next version of Slackware?
    >>
    >> Olive

    >
    > I don't know about emacs, which I upgraded on my own, but there seems to
    > exist some problem with TeXLive. This isuite huge, actually out of bounds
    > for a distro like slack. And one needs a huge amount of knowledge to
    > build a reasonable subset. Unfortunately, I think TeX is not PVs
    > speciality. (Maybe I'm wrong, but we have always been lagging behind
    > state of the art LaTeX).
    >
    > I was hoping for a comment by a resident latex and auctex guru ...



    Well, I'm by no means a guru, but use LaTeX a lot. TeXLive is freely
    downloadable and installs like a dream. Auctex ditto.


    atb


    Glyn
    --
    RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
    GAFC http://slackbook.org/ The Official Source :-)
    STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...inux.slackware
    JFGI http://jfgi.us/

  9. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Glyn Millington wrote (Wed, 06 Feb 2008 08:47:44 +0000):

    > Franz Sauerzopf writes:
    >
    >> Olive wrote (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:40:48 +0100):
    >> Slackware still
    >>> use tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years
    >>> (which recommend texlive).

    > Well, I'm by no means a guru, but use LaTeX a lot. TeXLive is freely
    > downloadable and installs like a dream. Auctex ditto.
    >


    Sure, but that is not the op's question. I'm also wondering about the
    future inclusion of Latex. I know I can install TexLive, but I also know
    (La)Tex should be in a decent distro. I hope it will not suffer the
    gnome's fate.

    Have a nice day

    Franz

  10. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:40:48 +0100, Olive wrote:

    > I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware.


    Based on performance to date, Slackware is the most likely to survive :-)

    > Slackware still use
    > tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which
    > recommend texlive).


    Does tetex not work anymore? Forgive me for asking, I haven't used LaTeX
    much this century.

    > Also I still do not see the current version of emacs
    > in current (and that you should not be a big deal to upgrade).


    Like TeX, emacs is not a universal concern, even though it is important
    to those who use it.

    Please note:

    http://www.xkcd.com/378/

    > What
    > happens... what could we expect for the next version of Slackware?


    I'm in no rush, as long as PV gets it right.

    Philosophically, I like the approach that Slack has. Build a solid base
    system, screw with everything as little as possible, and make it easy to
    get and install the latest stuff by being a solid platform.

    If you don't want to build the stuff from scratch, it seems asking here
    will often result in some kind person building a package for you.

    Cheers,
    Mark
    --
    Signature has no valid formatting tags

  11. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Two Ravens :
    > Olive wrote:
    >
    >> What happens... what could we expect for the next version of
    >> Slackware?

    >
    > Mayhap the question is rather *when* to can expect the next version of
    > SlackwareŽ. See the thread Slackware Release Fun & Games to have your
    > guess. As Franz Sauerzopf wrote one can always install the latest
    > version of Emacs, the typesetting programmes seem to be more
    > problematic but as Old Man wrote, let the man know of your concerns, or
    > even offer to help.
    >
    > Surely however it is better to wait for him to have a stable version
    > ready, than to worry that it has been about seven months since the
    > release of 12.0? Is there really a need for SlackwareŽ 12.1/13.0 so
    > soon?


    I'm still waiting for 5.0.

    --
    Change is the essential process of all existence.
    -- Spock, "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield", stardate 5730.2

    www.websterscafe.com

  12. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Handover Phist wrote:

    > I'm still waiting for 5.0.


    You obviously must have missed 4.0, I'd suggest jumping straight to 12.1
    or 13 when it arrives, but check that the hardware you're running 3.0
    on will handle it.

    --
    Two Ravens
    "Tom Newton truly the WilliamTopaz McGonagall of
    alt.os.linux.slackware!"



  13. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    On 2008-02-06, Franz Sauerzopf wrote:
    > Glyn Millington wrote (Wed, 06 Feb 2008 08:47:44 +0000):
    >
    >> Franz Sauerzopf writes:
    >>
    >>> Olive wrote (Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:40:48 +0100):
    >>> Slackware still
    >>>> use tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years
    >>>> (which recommend texlive).

    >> Well, I'm by no means a guru, but use LaTeX a lot. TeXLive is freely
    >> downloadable and installs like a dream. Auctex ditto.


    > Sure, but that is not the op's question. I'm also wondering about the
    > future inclusion of Latex. I know I can install TexLive, but I also know
    > (La)Tex should be in a decent distro. I hope it will not suffer the
    > gnome's fate.


    FWIW... I discussed this a bit with Pat before 12.0 came out. As
    someone else pointed out, texlive is huge, and trying to figure out
    how to cut it down to a reasonable size in a reasonable way is
    problematic. I poked around a bit and came up with a subset that *I*
    thought was reasonable, but
    (a) it was still huge compared to tetex (large enough to make
    Slackware need another CD), and
    (b) there are probably people who would miss the parts that I didn't
    need.

    But I encourage anyone interested to try to cut down texlive to
    something reasonable, maybe you can do way better than me, without
    losing parts that are more or less essential.

    Another wrench in the works is that texlive 2008 is supposed to be out
    in a few months (IIRC a posting on comp.text.tex).


    Someone asked about tetex... since it is no longer maintained, it is
    getting rather outdated.

    Cheers.
    Jim

  14. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    On 2008-02-05, Olive wrote:
    > I get a bit worrying about the future of Slackware. Slackware still use
    > tetex while it is not maintained any more by upstream for 2 years (which
    > recommend texlive). Also I still do not see the current version of emacs
    > in current (and that you should not be a big deal to upgrade). What
    > happens... what could we expect for the next version of Slackware?


    Though I see that others have also replied, just my two bits as both an
    Emacs and LaTeX user:

    (i) Emacs should be easy enough to update to vers. 22. Perhaps PV isn't
    yet aware of the new version. (Minimally, the fact that Emacs hasn't yet
    been updated suggest that PV isn't an Emacs user! :-) )

    (ii) TeTeX should be dropped because it's nearly three years old and no
    longer supported. This would also free up space. LaTeX users can use
    TeXLive, which is easy enough to install. I don't deny that it would be
    nice to have a modestly sized TeX/LaTeX package for Slackware (or for
    any other Linux distribution, for that matter), but trimming down
    TeXLive isn't so straightforward, as many have discovered.

    Frankly, I don't see why Slackware should include a TeX/LaTeX
    installation any more or less than it should include OpenOffice.org. I
    imagine that there are in fact more Slackware users who use OOo than
    there are who use TeX/LaTeX, so I feel that the inclsion of the latter
    would have to be justified on the availability of a modestly sized and
    up-to-date TeX/LaTeX package, which isn't the case at this time.

    Christopher

  15. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Two Ravens wrote:
    > Handover Phist wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I'm still waiting for 5.0.

    >
    >
    > You obviously must have missed 4.0, I'd suggest jumping straight to 12.1
    > or 13 when it arrives, but check that the hardware you're running 3.0
    > on will handle it.
    >


    I think he was only making a joke about the 4.0 -> 7.0 hyperleap...

    Funny!

  16. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    On 2008-02-06, Mark South wrote:

    > Does tetex not work anymore? Forgive me for asking, I haven't used LaTeX
    > much this century.


    Screw a buncha tetex. What I want 22 for is, it supposedly has an su
    command ....mule, dung, somthing like that..... which lets you view/edit
    root files without having to start emacs as root. Also, I understand it
    also adds dc to the mix. But then, I'm way behind in my emacs practice.
    Feel free to flog me about the head and shoulders for my inaccuracies.

    nb

  17. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    notbob writes:

    > On 2008-02-06, Mark South wrote:
    >
    >> Does tetex not work anymore? Forgive me for asking, I haven't used LaTeX
    >> much this century.

    >
    > Screw a buncha tetex. What I want 22 for is, it supposedly has an su
    > command ....mule, dung, somthing like that..... which lets you view/edit
    > root files without having to start emacs as root. Also, I understand it
    > also adds dc to the mix. But then, I'm way behind in my emacs practice.
    > Feel free to flog me about the head and shoulders for my inaccuracies.


    What you want is Tramp!!


    http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/TrampMode


    atb







    Glyn
    --
    RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
    GAFC http://slackbook.org/ The Official Source :-)
    STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...inux.slackware
    JFGI http://jfgi.us/

  18. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Chris Sorenson wrote:

    > I think he was only making a joke about the 4.0 -> 7.0 hyperleap...
    >
    > Funny!


    I thought so too, but as usual my attempts at humour are somewhat
    leaden, comes from having written numbers of turgid reports for Local
    government in my long lost youth. I apologise!
    --
    Two Ravens
    "...hit the squirrel..."

  19. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Two Ravens :
    > Chris Sorenson wrote:
    >
    >> I think he was only making a joke about the 4.0 -> 7.0 hyperleap...
    >>
    >> Funny!

    >
    > I thought so too, but as usual my attempts at humour are somewhat
    > leaden, comes from having written numbers of turgid reports for Local
    > government in my long lost youth. I apologise!


    I took your reply as a continuation of the joke after reading it a
    second time .

    --
    But we've only fondled the surface of that subject.
    -- Virginia Masters, of Master & Johnson

    www.websterscafe.com

  20. Re: still no emacs 22 nor texlive in current

    Handover Phist wrote:

    > I took your reply as a continuation of the joke after reading it a
    > second time .


    Its very kind of you to say so, but as I said "my attempts at humour are
    somewhat leaden", otherwise it wouldn't have needed to be read twice.
    --
    Two Ravens
    "...hit the squirrel..."

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast