Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/11/15/17:21:30
Markus Hoenicka wrote:
> Ok, "latest" was a bit of an exaggeration. Fact is that the MiKTeX
> installer needs versions of Windows DLLs which are *not* in e.g. a
> WinNT4 installation up to Service Pack 5 (the latest that I've
> installed).
Is there some reason you can't install SP 6a? I don't know if that would
have what you need either, but still, why go slumming any more than you have
to?
> I bet it won't work on Win95 either.
Maybe not. Probably not on Win3.1 either. Or 3.0. Or DOS.
With all due respect friend, 1995 *was* approximately six years ago.
> The MiKTeX maintainer
> used to distribute these DLLs but he does so no more.
It's likely not legal for him to do so, depending on the particular DLLs in
question.
> You wrongly
> assume that everyone happily uses Internet Explorer, so this is not a
> reasonable path to provide the missing DLLs.
Well, you wrongly assume that just because you have Internet Explorer
installed that you're forced to use it, happily or otherwise. You aren't.
> So on an older Windows
> system *without* Internet Explorer MiKTeX will not install. Period.
>
Ok, so install IE then. Or get a newer version of Windows. Problem solved,
no?
Or hey, better yet, install a 'real OS' like Linux that you'll *never* have
to update! Never did quite understand how exactly that worked....
> (Please excuse my rants about MiKTeX. IMHO it is bad software design
> to couple a widely ported software like TeX to the Windows/IE update
> spiral by means of the installation software. The Cygwin and fpTeX
> installers show that this is not necessary)
Neither work on Windows 3.1. Or DOS. I don't see how that then qualifies
as 'bad software design'.
Don't get me wrong Markus, I'm a far cry from Bill's biggest fan, and I'm
(trying to) use Cygwin's teTeX myself, but I don't think you're thinking is
entirely clear here. You're using Cygwin right? Hence Windows? Hence
you've chosen to get on that "Windows/IE update spiral"? I don't
understand; you'd prefer that Windows was the same now as it was in 1995?
Why not the same as it was in the even-worse-old-days of 3.1? Or 3.0? Or
2.0? Or DOS? Time marches on, and not just in Windows-land: what was Linux
looking like back in '95? Will a '95-vintage Linux installation build and
run teTeX?
Jeez, now you got me ranting ;-). Sorry folks.
Gary R. Van Sickle
Braemar Inc.
11481 Rupp Dr.
Burnsville, MN 55337
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -