On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 10:45 +0000, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > On 28 January 2010 01:16, Matthew Saltzman <mjs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 01:47 +0200, Jussi Lehtola wrote: > >> On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 23:08 +0000, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > >> > 2010/1/27 Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > >> > > I suspect a lot of our users will be similarly annoyed. This is one of > >> > > those kinds of tools that "just works" and so people stick with it. > >> > > >> > Well.. perhaps. OTOH people seem to have happily migrated from xpdf to > >> > evince over time (or at least that's my perception). > >> > >> What do you mean? > >> > >> # yum -y install xpdf > >> (clip) > >> ---> Package xpdf.x86_64 1:3.02-15.fc12 set to be updated > >> > >> xpdf is still there, so actually nothing brutal has yet happened in the > >> case of xpdf. When xpdf *is* removed I'd expect cries of rage. > > > > Indeed, there are several features of xpdf that evince doesn't yet > > support. Until it does, it turns out to be useless with emacs-auctex, > > for one thing. > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=451210 > > Well, evince may actually be useable from the auctex perspective at > this point. Also, auctex upstream has a new backend for dealing with > file viewing which will also make it easier to integrate with > xdg-open/evince/okular Cool. Glad to see this getting a second look. Thanks.! > -- Matthew Saltzman Clemson University Math Sciences mjs AT clemson DOT edu http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
