Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dvipdfmx - A DVI to PDF translator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433225 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus@xxxxxxx 2008-02-17 17:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Yeah, there was a minor release in 2007 which incorporated two patches, but no > major development. Before that, last release was 2001. That's not necessarily bad, it may also be that dvipdfm is mature. > I agree that both can co-exist, but what functionality is provided by dvipdfm > that's not in dvipdfmx? If there's good reason, I'll knock up a dvipdfm package, > but if there's no technical reason, I'd rather not bother. I don't know exactly what you mean by technical reason. In any case dvipdfm is already in texlive, so maybe it is not worth bothering packaging it separately if it is not updated more often than texlive. However I think that a dvipdfm package should stay, especially if it works well and isn't updated often. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review