X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<20051207163721.64231.qmail@web51505.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:	Wed, 7 Dec 2005 08:37:21 -0800 (PST)
From:	"James R. Phillips" <antiskid56-cygwin AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To:	antiskid56-cygwin AT yahoo DOT com
Subject:	Re: octave-forge dependency?
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version:	1.0
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Chris Taylor wrote:

>...the OP _doesn't_ want his configure scripts picking up tetex...

This is what the OP said:

"If I don't put miktex in the front of my path, then the configury stuff is
happy (finds tetex, uses tetex), but *I'm* not happy because *I* want to call
miktex binaries from my cygwin interactive shell."

I believe a reasonable interpretation of this is that he generally doesn't mind
if packages configure to use tetex and even use tetex, as long as he gets
miktex by default from the command line.  This is the situation my solution is
designed to address.  If, as you claim, he _cannot_ have packages configure to
use tetex, then I admit my solution does not work.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -