tetex-bin: package doesn't install because of missing mfw binary

[Debian Bug Importer]

Automatically imported from Debian bug report #334713 http://bugs.debian.org/334713

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Automatically imported from Debian bug report #334713 http://bugs.debian.org/334713

[Florent Rougon (f-rougon)]

Hi,

Please tell us what you get from:

  # cnf="$("$(kpsewhich --var-value=TEXMFMAIN)/texconfig/tcfmgr" \
    --cmd find --file fmtutil.cnf)" \
    && echo "cnf: $cnf" && grep mfw "$cnf"; unset cnf

--
Florent

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:41:22 +0200
From: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Cc: Florian Cramer <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: tetex-bin: package doesn't install because of missing mfw
 binary

Hi,

Please tell us what you get from:

  # cnf="$("$(kpsewhich --var-value=TEXMFMAIN)/texconfig/tcfmgr" \
    --cmd find --file fmtutil.cnf)" \
    && echo "cnf: $cnf" && grep mfw "$cnf"; unset cnf

--
Florent

[Florent Rougon (f-rougon)]

Forwarding Florian's answer, since I got it privately.

Am Mittwoch, 19. Oktober 2005 um 23:41:22 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Florent Rougon:
> Hi,
>
> Please tell us what you get from:
>
> # cnf="$ni

The following:

cnf: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
mfw mfw - mf.ini

As said, the error happens when I install tetex from scratch.

Bests,

-F

--
gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc
http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70

--
Florent

[Florent Rougon (f-rougon)]

Florent Rougon <email address hidden> wrote:

> The following:
>
> cnf: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
> mfw mfw - mf.ini
>
> As said, the error happens when I install tetex from scratch.

Maybe you think it is from scratch, but actually isn't? Because with:

  # dpkg -P tetex-extra tetex-bin tetex-base tetex-doc texinfo tex-common

followed by:

  # apt-get install tetex-bin tetex-extra

I get:

  # cnf="$("$(kpsewhich --var-value=TEXMFMAIN)/texconfig/tcfmgr" \
  dquote cmdsubst> --cmd find --file fmtutil.cnf)" \
  > && echo "cnf: $cnf" && grep mfw "$cnf"; unset cnf
  cnf: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
  #

i.e., mfw does *not* appear in fmtutil.cnf.

I don't know why (maybe this format is obsolete), but it explains why I
don't get the error you reported.

--
Florent

[Florent Rougon (f-rougon)]

Forwarding again...

Am Donnerstag, 20. Oktober 2005 um 10:59:01 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Florent Rougon:

> I don't know why (maybe this format is obsolete), but it explains why I
> don't get the error you reported.

Thanks. I purged all my latex packages, including the ones that depended
on a tetex install, and this did the trick. Don't ask me why. Probably
there was some old crufty, stale package interfering with the upgrade.

Thanks again,

-F

--
gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc
http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70

So, the bug was caused by a stale entry in fmtutil.cnf, as it seems.
Frank, what do you want to do next?

--
Florent

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:47:04 +0200
From: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: [Florian Cramer] Re: tetex-bin: package doesn't install because of
 missing mfw binary

--=-=-=

Forwarding Florian's answer, since I got it privately.

--=-=-=
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

X-From-Line: <email address hidden> Thu Oct 20 10:19:53 2005
Return-Path: <email address hidden>
X-Original-To: <email address hidden>
Delivered-To: <email address hidden>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by florent.hn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF4A52F139
 for <email address hidden>; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:19:53 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: <email address hidden>
Received: from pop.free.fr [212.27.48.3] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-6.2.5.2)
 for <email address hidden> (single-drop); Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:19:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (qmail 8548 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2005 06:31:29 -0000
Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (130.133.4.66)
 by mrelay3-2.free.fr with SMTP; 20 Oct 2005 06:31:29 -0000
Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.53)
 for <email address hidden> with esmtp id <1ESTxZ-0004TV-Cs>; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:31:29 +0200
Received: from pd9530fb3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.83.15.179]
 helo=cantsin.dyndns.org) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.53)
 for <email address hidden> with esmtpsa id <1ESTxY-0004bQ-9h>; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:31:29 +0200
Received: by cantsin.dyndns.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation);
 Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:34:45 +0200
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:34:45 +0200
From: Florian Cramer <email address hidden>
To: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: tetex-bin: package doesn't install because of missing mfw
 binary
Message-ID: <email address hidden>
References: <email address hidden>
 <email address hidden>
In-Reply-To: <email address hidden>
X-Spambayes-Classification: ham; 0.00
Lines: 23
Xref: florent.maison Inbox:88370
MIME-Version: 1.0

Am Mittwoch, 19. Oktober 2005 um 23:41:22 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Florent Rougon:
> Hi,
>
> Please tell us what you get from:
>
> # cnf="$ni

The following:

cnf: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
mfw mfw - mf.ini

As said, the error happens when I install tetex from scratch.

Bests,

-F

--
gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc
http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70

--=-=-=

--
Florent

--=-=-=--

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:59:01 +0200
From: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Cc: Florian Cramer <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: [Florian Cramer] Re: tetex-bin: package doesn't install because
 of missing mfw binary

Florent Rougon <email address hidden> wrote:

> The following:
>
> cnf: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
> mfw mfw - mf.ini
>
> As said, the error happens when I install tetex from scratch.

Maybe you think it is from scratch, but actually isn't? Because with:

  # dpkg -P tetex-extra tetex-bin tetex-base tetex-doc texinfo tex-common

followed by:

  # apt-get install tetex-bin tetex-extra

I get:

  # cnf="$("$(kpsewhich --var-value=TEXMFMAIN)/texconfig/tcfmgr" \
  dquote cmdsubst> --cmd find --file fmtutil.cnf)" \
  > && echo "cnf: $cnf" && grep mfw "$cnf"; unset cnf
  cnf: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
  #

i.e., mfw does *not* appear in fmtutil.cnf.

I don't know why (maybe this format is obsolete), but it explains why I
don't get the error you reported.

--
Florent

[Frank Küster (frank-debian)]

Florent Rougon <email address hidden> wrote:

> Florent Rougon <email address hidden> wrote:
>
>> The following:
>>
>> cnf: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
>> mfw mfw - mf.ini
>>
>> As said, the error happens when I install tetex from scratch.
>
> Maybe you think it is from scratch, but actually isn't?

Yes, the entry in fmtutil.cnf that uses mfw must be either a local
change or (unlikely) from a buggy package.

> i.e., mfw does *not* appear in fmtutil.cnf.
>
> I don't know why (maybe this format is obsolete), but it explains why I
> don't get the error you reported.

mfw was the name of the mf binary with X11 support, mf-nowin is the name
without. In 2.0, /usr/bin/mf was a symlink to /usr/bin/mfw, now it the
binary itself is called /usr/bin/mf.

I think this is an upstream change, but restoring the old behavior
probably won't hurt anybody. We could also create the reverse symlink
(mfw -> mf), but then we get problems in case we want to split of a
tetex-bin-nowin package and want /usr/bin/mf to be managed with
update-alternatives.

Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:44:16 +0200
From: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: tetex-bin: package doesn't install because of missing mfw
 binary

--=-=-=

Forwarding again...

--=-=-=
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

X-From-Line: <email address hidden> Thu Oct 20 11:36:39 2005
Return-Path: <email address hidden>
X-Original-To: <email address hidden>
Delivered-To: <email address hidden>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by florent.hn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A68022F130
 for <email address hidden>; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:36:39 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: <email address hidden>
Received: from pop.free.fr [212.27.48.3] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-6.2.5.2)
 for <email address hidden> (single-drop); Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:36:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (qmail 7120 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2005 09:29:14 -0000
Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (130.133.4.66)
 by mrelay4-1.free.fr with SMTP; 20 Oct 2005 09:29:14 -0000
Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.53)
 for <email address hidden> with esmtp id <1ESWja-00037M-0i>; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:29:14 +0200
Received: from pd9530fb3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.83.15.179]
 helo=cantsin.dyndns.org) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.53)
 for <email address hidden> with esmtpsa id <1ESWjY-0001R6-Ts>; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:29:14 +0200
Received: by cantsin.dyndns.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation);
 Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:32:31 +0200
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 11:32:31 +0200
From: Florian Cramer <email address hidden>
To: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: [Florian Cramer] Re: tetex-bin: package doesn't install because
 of missing mfw binary
Message-ID: <email address hidden>
References: <email address hidden> <email address hidden>
In-Reply-To: <email address hidden>
X-Spambayes-Classification: ham; 0.00
Lines: 18
Xref: florent.maison Inbox:88374
MIME-Version: 1.0

Am Donnerstag, 20. Oktober 2005 um 10:59:01 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Florent Rougon:

> I don't know why (maybe this format is obsolete), but it explains why I
> don't get the error you reported.

Thanks. I purged all my latex packages, including the ones that depended
on a tetex install, and this did the trick. Don't ask me why. Probably
there was some old crufty, stale package interfering with the upgrade.

Thanks again,

-F

--
gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc
http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70

--=-=-=

So, the bug was caused by a stale entry in fmtutil.cnf, as it seems.
Frank, what do you want to do next?

--
Florent

--=-=-=--

[Ralf Stubner (ralf-stubner)]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 12:40 +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> mfw was the name of the mf binary with X11 support, mf-nowin is the name
> without. In 2.0, /usr/bin/mf was a symlink to /usr/bin/mfw, now it the
> binary itself is called /usr/bin/mf.
>
> I think this is an upstream change,

Yes, this is an upstream change.
teTeX 2.0.2 compilde from source has
      mf -> mfw
      mf-nowin
      mfw
teTeX 3.0 compiled from source has
      mf
      mf-nowin

> but restoring the old behavior
> probably won't hurt anybody. We could also create the reverse symlink
> (mfw -> mf), but then we get problems in case we want to split of a
> tetex-bin-nowin package and want /usr/bin/mf to be managed with
> update-alternatives.

ACK

cheerio
ralf

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 12:40:14 +0200
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Frank_K=FCster?= <email address hidden>
To: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>
Cc: <email address hidden>, Florian Cramer <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#334713: [Florian Cramer] Re: tetex-bin: package doesn't
 install because of missing mfw binary

Florent Rougon <email address hidden> wrote:

> Florent Rougon <email address hidden> wrote:
>
>> The following:
>>
>> cnf: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/fmtutil.cnf
>> mfw mfw - mf.ini
>>
>> As said, the error happens when I install tetex from scratch.
>
> Maybe you think it is from scratch, but actually isn't?=20

Yes, the entry in fmtutil.cnf that uses mfw must be either a local
change or (unlikely) from a buggy package.

> i.e., mfw does *not* appear in fmtutil.cnf.
>
> I don't know why (maybe this format is obsolete), but it explains why I
> don't get the error you reported.

mfw was the name of the mf binary with X11 support, mf-nowin is the name
without. In 2.0, /usr/bin/mf was a symlink to /usr/bin/mfw, now it the
binary itself is called /usr/bin/mf.

I think this is an upstream change, but restoring the old behavior
probably won't hurt anybody. We could also create the reverse symlink
(mfw -> mf), but then we get problems in case we want to split of a
tetex-bin-nowin package and want /usr/bin/mf to be managed with
update-alternatives.=20

Regards, Frank
--=20
Frank K=FCster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Z=FCrich
Debian Developer

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <20051020120238.GC2931@thinkpad>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 14:02:38 +0200
From: Ralf Stubner <email address hidden>
To: Frank =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=FCster?= <email address hidden>,
 <email address hidden>
Cc: Florent Rougon <email address hidden>,
 Florian Cramer <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#334713: [Florian Cramer] Re: tetex-bin: package doesn't install because of missing
 mfw binary

On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 12:40 +0200, Frank K=FCster wrote:
> mfw was the name of the mf binary with X11 support, mf-nowin is the nam=
e
> without. In 2.0, /usr/bin/mf was a symlink to /usr/bin/mfw, now it the
> binary itself is called /usr/bin/mf.
>=20
> I think this is an upstream change,=20

Yes, this is an upstream change.=20
teTeX 2.0.2 compilde from source has
      mf -> mfw
      mf-nowin
      mfw
teTeX 3.0 compiled from source has
      mf
      mf-nowin

> but restoring the old behavior
> probably won't hurt anybody. We could also create the reverse symlink
> (mfw -> mf), but then we get problems in case we want to split of a
> tetex-bin-nowin package and want /usr/bin/mf to be managed with
> update-alternatives.=20

ACK

cheerio
ralf

[Jules Bean (jules)]

I had the problem described in this report.

A little investigation showed that the errant 'mfw' line was in
/etc/texmf/fmt.d/99postinf.cnf.

The wording at the top of that file is informative.

#####################################################################
#
# /etc/texmf/fmt.d/99postinst.cnf
#
# This file has been generated by tetex-bin's postinst script.
# teTeX no longer uses /etc/texmf/fmtutil.cnf for its configuration,
# but rather a file in /var/lib/texmf/web2c that is generated from
# configuration files in /etc/texmf/fmt.d.
#
# The postinst script detected that your old fmtutil.cnf contained
# lines that you seem to have added manually. In order to include those
# lines in the generated file, they have been extracted to this file,
# /etc/texmf/fmt.d/99postinst.cnf.
#
# You can add changes here, or in a new file in this directory, see
# the manpage of /usr/sbin/update-fmtutil(8). Note that if there are two
entries
# for a format, the second wins - because this file has number 99,
# it's entries will always be last
#
#####################################################################

I hope this helps you solve this problem.

Jules Bean

[Frank Küster (frank-debian)]

Jules Bean <email address hidden> wrote:

> # The postinst script detected that your old fmtutil.cnf contained
> # lines that you seem to have added manually. In order to include those
> # lines in the generated file, they have been extracted to this file,
> # /etc/texmf/fmt.d/99postinst.cnf.
[...]
> I hope this helps you solve this problem.

Yes, it clearly shows that the problem is the result of a local change
of the configuration, and cannot be blamed on tetex-bin. However, we
will again provide the mfw executable and thus fix the bug.

Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer

[Jules Bean (jules)]

Frank Küster wrote:
> Jules Bean <email address hidden> wrote:
>
>
>> I hope this helps you solve this problem.
>>
>
> Yes, it clearly shows that the problem is the result of a local change
> of the configuration, and cannot be blamed on tetex-bin. However, we
> will again provide the mfw executable and thus fix the bug.
>
I certainly don't specifically remember editing any of the fmt config
files. I barely comprehend what they do, even.

But, it is true that a couple of years ago I was playing with mfw, so
it's not impossible that I changed something then.

Jules

[Frank Küster (frank-debian)]

Source: tetex-bin
Source-Version: 3.0-10

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
tetex-bin, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

libkpathsea4-dev_3.0-10_i386.deb
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/libkpathsea4-dev_3.0-10_i386.deb
libkpathsea4_3.0-10_i386.deb
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/libkpathsea4_3.0-10_i386.deb
tetex-bin_3.0-10.diff.gz
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_3.0-10.diff.gz
tetex-bin_3.0-10.dsc
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_3.0-10.dsc
tetex-bin_3.0-10_i386.deb
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_3.0-10_i386.deb

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you
have further comments please address them to <email address hidden>,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Frank Küster <email address hidden> (supplier of updated tetex-bin package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing <email address hidden>)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:54:43 +0200
Source: tetex-bin
Binary: tetex-bin libkpathsea4-dev libkpathsea4
Architecture: source i386
Version: 3.0-10
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: teTeX maintainers <email address hidden>
Changed-By: Frank Küster <email address hidden>
Description:
 libkpathsea4 - path search library for teTeX (runtime part)
 libkpathsea4-dev - path search library for teTeX (devel part)
 tetex-bin - The teTeX binary files
Closes: 334613 334713 334730
Changes:
 tetex-bin (3.0-10) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Changed $progname to $scriptname in fmtutil and fmtutil-sys. We
     tested whether progname was correctly set to fmtutil-sys, but
     $progname is also used as a command-line option to the TeX engines,
     which propagates to the environment. Therefore when fmtutil
     recursively called itself with -progname=jadetex, it failed (closes:
     #334613). Many thanks to all who reported this bug and gave input,
     special thanks that you used Followup-for and didn't open duplicates!
   * Really install changelog.Debian.experimental [frank]
   * Install the old md5sums for ucf-managed files [frank]
   * Call debconf-updatepo in the clean target (closes: #334730) [frank]
   * Let the clean target fail if the patches do not unapply cleanly,
     i.e. they need refreshing [frank]
   * Install the mfw binary again (closes: #334713)
   * Conflict with xmltex that still has bug #328749.
Files:
 168db4da90de005d8021f0ee1fa06027 965 tex optional tetex-bin_3.0-10.dsc
 26ea17f17be2db3c585e44ad8feab7bd 131174 tex optional tetex-bin_3.0-10.diff.gz
 ccfcb04bdadd3e4f406be9dcc6966355 3842328 tex optional tetex-bin_3.0-10_i386.deb
 ddcaecf6234fe39addd83ddc2b6b0ede 73506 libs optional libkpathsea4_3.0-10_i386.deb
 cf9642d6197852ac4c73f8698c58fdc2 70144 libdevel optional libkpathsea4-dev_3.0-10_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDV8Qc+xs9YyJS+hoRAvAuAJ9tCch...

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:10:53 +0100
From: Jules Bean <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: More info

I had the problem described in this report.

A little investigation showed that the errant 'mfw' line was in
/etc/texmf/fmt.d/99postinf.cnf.

The wording at the top of that file is informative.

#####################################################################
#
# /etc/texmf/fmt.d/99postinst.cnf
#
# This file has been generated by tetex-bin's postinst script.
# teTeX no longer uses /etc/texmf/fmtutil.cnf for its configuration,
# but rather a file in /var/lib/texmf/web2c that is generated from
# configuration files in /etc/texmf/fmt.d.
#
# The postinst script detected that your old fmtutil.cnf contained
# lines that you seem to have added manually. In order to include those
# lines in the generated file, they have been extracted to this file,
# /etc/texmf/fmt.d/99postinst.cnf.
#
# You can add changes here, or in a new file in this directory, see
# the manpage of /usr/sbin/update-fmtutil(8). Note that if there are two
entries
# for a format, the second wins - because this file has number 99,
# it's entries will always be last
#
#####################################################################

I hope this helps you solve this problem.

Jules Bean

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 18:04:29 +0200
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Frank_K=FCster?= <email address hidden>
To: Jules Bean <email address hidden>
Cc: <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#334713: More info

Jules Bean <email address hidden> wrote:

> # The postinst script detected that your old fmtutil.cnf contained
> # lines that you seem to have added manually. In order to include those
> # lines in the generated file, they have been extracted to this file,
> # /etc/texmf/fmt.d/99postinst.cnf.
[...]
> I hope this helps you solve this problem.

Yes, it clearly shows that the problem is the result of a local change
of the configuration, and cannot be blamed on tetex-bin. However, we
will again provide the mfw executable and thus fix the bug.

Regards, Frank
--=20
Frank K=FCster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Z=FCrich
Debian Developer

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 17:36:05 +0100
From: Jules Bean <email address hidden>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Frank_K=FCster?= <email address hidden>
CC: <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#334713: More info

Frank K�wrote:
> Jules Bean <email address hidden> wrote:
>
>
>> I hope this helps you solve this problem.
>>
>
> Yes, it clearly shows that the problem is the result of a local change
> of the configuration, and cannot be blamed on tetex-bin. However, we
> will again provide the mfw executable and thus fix the bug.
>
I certainly don't specifically remember editing any of the fmt config
files. I barely comprehend what they do, even.

But, it is true that a couple of years ago I was playing with mfw, so
it's not impossible that I changed something then.

Jules

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-Id: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:32:12 -0700
From: =?utf-8?q?Frank_K=C3=BCster?= <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: Bug#334713: fixed in tetex-bin 3.0-10

Source: tetex-bin
Source-Version: 3.0-10

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
tetex-bin, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

libkpathsea4-dev_3.0-10_i386.deb
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/libkpathsea4-dev_3.0-10_i386.deb
libkpathsea4_3.0-10_i386.deb
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/libkpathsea4_3.0-10_i386.deb
tetex-bin_3.0-10.diff.gz
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_3.0-10.diff.gz
tetex-bin_3.0-10.dsc
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_3.0-10.dsc
tetex-bin_3.0-10_i386.deb
  to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_3.0-10_i386.deb

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you
have further comments please address them to <email address hidden>,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Frank Küster <email address hidden> (supplier of updated tetex-bin package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing <email address hidden>)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:54:43 +0200
Source: tetex-bin
Binary: tetex-bin libkpathsea4-dev libkpathsea4
Architecture: source i386
Version: 3.0-10
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: teTeX maintainers <email address hidden>
Changed-By: Frank Küster <email address hidden>
Description:
 libkpathsea4 - path search library for teTeX (runtime part)
 libkpathsea4-dev - path search library for teTeX (devel part)
 tetex-bin - The teTeX binary files
Closes: 334613 334713 334730
Changes:
 tetex-bin (3.0-10) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Changed $progname to $scriptname in fmtutil and fmtutil-sys. We
     tested whether progname was correctly set to fmtutil-sys, but
     $progname is also used as a command-line option to the TeX engines,
     which propagates to the environment. Therefore when fmtutil
     recursively called itself with -progname=jadetex, it failed (closes:
     #334613). Many thanks to all who reported this bug and gave input,
     special thanks that you used Followup-for and didn't open duplicates!
   * Really install changelog.Debian.experimental [frank]
   * Install the old md5sums for ucf-managed files [frank]
   * Call debconf-updatepo in the clean target (closes: #334730) [frank]
   * Let the clean target fail if the patches do not unapply cleanly,
     i.e. they need refreshing [frank]
   * Install the mfw binary again (closes: #334713)
   * Conflict with xmltex that still has bug #328749.
Files:
 168db4da90de005d8021f0ee1fa06027 965 tex optional tetex-bin_3.0-10.dsc
 26ea17f17be2db3c585e44ad8feab7bd 131174 tex optional tetex-bin_3.0-10.diff.gz
 ccfcb04bdadd3e4f406be9dcc6966355 3842328 tex optional tetex-bin_3.0-10_i386.deb
 ddcaecf6234fe39addd83ddc2b6b0ede 73506 libs optional ...

[Tollef Fog Heen (tfheen)]

Seems to have been fixed in -10 and we have -13ubuntu1, so closing.