[tex-live] ifxetex package missing from collection-xetex
siepo at cybercomm.nl
Sun Feb 4 16:20:52 CET 2007
On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 08:13:04PM +0100, Reinhard Kotucha wrote:
> >>>>> "Philip" == Philip Taylor (Webmaster) <" <P.Taylor at Rhul.Ac.Uk>> writes:
> > Reinhard Kotucha wrote:
> >> Phil, as you know I'm not a Windows user (except at work). Most
> >> Windows users use MikTeX (I had been told). I don't know
> >> anything about MikTeX but I assume that you tried it. Can you
> >> explain briefly why you prefer TeXLive over MikTeX?
> > That's quite difficult to answer, because my perceptions are
> > blurred by the passage of time. I am reasonably confident that
> > there /was/ a time when I used MikTeX, but I seem to recall that I
> > ran into some problems which I was unable to solve. I therefore
> > consulted Sebastian (he and Chris Rowley are the two people to
> > whom I turn when I am /really/ stuck), and he advised that I
> > migrate to TeX Live. This I did, and I have never looked back.
> Maybe Christian Schenk helps people too if they ask him. But
> nevertheless, a big advantage of TeXLive (on Windows) is that it can
> be customized without changing the registry. This is, in my opinion,
> significantly easier. See also TUGBoat 27/1, pages 24...25.
One reason for MikTeX's popularity may be that TeXnicCenter and
WinEdit configure themselves almost automatically for MikTeX.
TeXnicCenter appears to consult the registry for this; I didn't
MikTeX has GUI tools for at least some configuration, so
end users don't have to access the registry directly.
Don't construct this as a defense of the registry. I consider it an
insane, evil invention.
Of course, for a shared network install you want a preconfigured
user installation, and then GUI tools aren't much help. For MikTeX
2.5 things were a bit harder than for MikTeX 2.4, and I have heard
of other people who gave up on MikTeX 2.5 for a network install.
More information about the tex-live