This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: docbook xml toolchain
- From: Patrick Eisenacher <eisenacher at fillmore-labs dot com>
- To: Andreas <news dot Andreas at gmx dot net>
- Cc: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 13:22:14 +0200
- Subject: Re: docbook xml toolchain
- Organization: Fillmore Labs GmbH <http://www.fillmore-labs.com/>
- References: <BDEIKLGLODPANMFFLBDIMEHMCDAA.news.Andreas@gmx.net>
Hi Andreas,
glad to hear that you managed to get the latest passivetex alive &
kickin on cygwin. Just for completeness, here are the answers to your
questions:
Andreas schrieb:
Hmmm, sounds good, I guess /bin/fmtutil needs to be patched, right? There
are other files related to fmtutil.cnf:
/usr/share/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf.cygwin-dist
/usr/share/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf.cygwin-orig
/usr/share/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf.orig
Actually, the file's name is fmtutil.cnf, but Windows strangely doesn't
give you its extension. Leave the other ones alone. They are not used.
Let´s assume that I found the lines that needs a fix and put this in
DocbookCygwinFmtutil.diff, does a simple
patch -N -u /usr/share/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf DocbookCygwinFmtutil.diff
would be sufficient or should I rerun your script (further dependencies in
the process of buliding the passivetex stuff?)?
You have to call
mktexlsr
texconfig confall
texconfig rehash
texconfig init
after patching, otherwise your modifications won't be reflected in tex's
configuration tables.
Would a second, third,... run of your install script potentially break
things that were created at the first run?
No, if patch (the executable) realizes that a patch has already been
applied, it ignores it. You can safely rerun a patch.
[snip]
I just converted the fo file into pdf using fop and it is nicely formatted.
My impression based on the feedback on the docbook-apps mailing list is
that fop gets more development than passivetex. But I could be
completely wrong about this. I haven't done any serious pdf generation.
I had just set up the docbook pdf toolchain once and gave it a couple of
tests. Which one (fop/passivetex) gives you the better results?
Cheers,
Patrick
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/