On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 09:34:38 -0400 (EDT), Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: > On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 at 5:03am, Jindrich Novy <jnovy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote > >> On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 21:33 +0100, Kostas Georgiou wrote: >>> >>> So, is a dvi viewer needed in core? >> >> It depends. One can use pdftex/pdflatex instead of tex/latex so that DVI >> viewers (and gv, dvips) are not needed in this case as the PDF is the >> only output. The dvips + gv way isn't always too smooth and I have to >> say that xdvi is still the best dvi viewer despite of its age. >> >> If the most of the teTeX users accepts the usage of pdftex tools, then >> moving at least some of the dvi tools to Extras makes sense. > > In contrast to your experience, I've always found latex/dvips to be > smoother and less error prone than pdflatex. And to agree with your > other point, xdvi is definitely the best DVI viewer. Viewing the .dvi What about Active-DVI¹. It's the one recommended by whizzytex². > is the way just about all the teTeX users I support work -- why bother > emedding the images in an output file until you really need to? > > -- > Joshua Baker-LePain > Department of Biomedical Engineering > Duke University Footnotes: ¹ http://pauillac.inria.fr/advi/#requirements ² http://cristal.inria.fr/whizzytex/ -- Leon -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
