[Axiom-developer] Re: Patch for SPADEDIT

[Ralf Hemmecke]

> Well, I just checked. A dvi generated with -src-specials does *not*
> contain the absolute paths. It is only kdvi which gives a misleading
> error message. I was confused. To jump to line 795 of Makefile.tex in
> Makefile.dvi you say

Note that sometimes the full path is what you want. Imagine you produce
a .dvi file and then move it to some other place completely independent
of where your .pamphlets are. For such a case, it's better to put the
full path into the source specials.

> > > Maybe Ralf has a solution for that problem,
> > Yep. Just a small patch to srcltx.sty and you can have xdvi jumping
> > to the .pamplet instead of .tex file. All explained in ALLPROSE.
>
> Great! Then it probably makes more sense to put srcltx into
> axiom.sty, as you suggested. And in any case, the pamphlets should be
> installed...

Well, here again, we have the same problem as with noweb and gcl etc. Do
we include it or don't we include it into the axiom distribution?

scrltx.sty is small enough to be included. We can update it from time to
time. (But it should surely be count an external part on which we
build.) However, as Martin suggested to make Hyperdoc open a .dvi file
would mean to require srcltx.sty instead of have it optional.

> > But nobody seems to be interested anyway. So why invest time?

> But if I read all documentation to ALLPROSE, svn, bash, who knows
> what, there'd be no time for research at all. I think, as author you
> should be prepared to answer questions even if you gave the answer in
> your article, even if you answered them already a million times.

I have no problem with answering questions. I was referring to the fact 
that there is not yet enough interest in this documentation format 
business. Axiom-developers seem to be happy with what is there now. No 
big complaints so far.

Ralf