Re: xdvi.cfg

On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 09:54:53AM +0100, Stefan Ulrich wrote:
> Well, this refers to the `standalone' xdvik distribution - should
> we change the wording for teTeX? What I wanted to say is that
> users should more or less ignore the file in the source distribution.

Well, I did not change Makefile.in (compared against the `standalone'
xdvik distribution), so I don't think that the documentation needs to
be different. I suggest to document what the Makefile does: it checks if
there is no file or an original existing file (xdvi.cfg) and installs
the supplied version in these cases, but not in case of an existing
modified file. XDvi is always installed.

> current teTeX ... maybe we should simply remove the entire
> README.t1fonts (and pointers to it) from teTeX since it's too
> confusing?

I think that some useful information is contained there and suggest to
keep it.

Thomas