Thanks for the reply.
Actually, I do know about the pdf options, and I agree that dvipdf is only a small extra step. But I really like the way xdvi works as compared with Preview -- it refreshes with a single keystroke, and is very fast.
If working with pdf, I would actually recommend xpdf over Preview -- assuming you're running X11, that is. It self-updates with a single keystroke, like xdvi.
I dislike TeXShop for the same reasons as you (I use emacs too, but under X11 -- courtesy fink).
If you're using X11, I would strongly recommend you try xpdf. And I think xdvi is even better (if you can get it to work; if you do, let me know!)
This may be off-topic, it's a request for information.
The only thing holding me back from migrating full-time to OS X (from years of Solaris use) is that I can't get LaTeX, or rather, xdvi, to work smoothly.
Case in point: I *just* used fink to install xfree86, then tetex, then xdvi on a brand new powerbook. xfree86 works great. Latex works great. But, just like everytime I've installed it on OS X, xdvi can't find fonts. So, I effectively can't use LateX smoothly.
Do you use xdvi, and if so, how well does it work for you?
Re: workspace management, I really like xfce (also available via fink. It gives you virtual desktops for X11, although not for aqua (butthen most of what I do is under X11 anyway).
Much as I dislike the idea of digital rights management, it seems to me that the entertainment industry has a valid concern about music being available without being paid for.
My premise: if I buy a book and allow all my friends to make photocopies of the whole book, that is a clear infringement of the rights of the author and/or publisher.
It seems to me that anyone who agrees with the above premise would have to agree that my making a copy of a CD/DVD for my friends would be an infringement. Is there a difference between the ethicality of the two situations? (I don't see one).
So, either (a) all the people who are in favor of free music availability reject the above premise or (b) I am missing something here. This has always puzzled me in the debate about making digital content available online.
Sorry if this particular example has already been discussed to death.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the reply. Actually, I do know about the pdf options, and I agree that dvipdf is only a small extra step. But I really like the way xdvi works as compared with Preview -- it refreshes with a single keystroke, and is very fast. If working with pdf, I would actually recommend xpdf over Preview -- assuming you're running X11, that is. It self-updates with a single keystroke, like xdvi. I dislike TeXShop for the same reasons as you (I use emacs too, but under X11 -- courtesy fink). If you're using X11, I would strongly recommend you try xpdf. And I think xdvi is even better (if you can get it to work; if you do, let me know!)
This may be off-topic, it's a request for information.
The only thing holding me back from migrating full-time to OS X (from years of Solaris use) is that I can't get LaTeX, or rather, xdvi, to work smoothly.
Case in point: I *just* used fink to install xfree86, then tetex, then xdvi on a brand new powerbook. xfree86 works great. Latex works great. But, just like everytime I've installed it on OS X, xdvi can't find fonts. So, I effectively can't use LateX smoothly.
Do you use xdvi, and if so, how well does it work for you?
Re: workspace management, I really like xfce (also available via fink. It gives you virtual desktops for X11, although not for aqua (butthen most of what I do is under X11 anyway).
You're a sysadmin and have been around computer users for years but you still dont know how to copy a file to a floppy??
Sorry, I couldn't resist this.
Much as I dislike the idea of digital rights management, it seems to me that the entertainment industry has a valid concern about music being available without being paid for. My premise: if I buy a book and allow all my friends to make photocopies of the whole book, that is a clear infringement of the rights of the author and/or publisher. It seems to me that anyone who agrees with the above premise would have to agree that my making a copy of a CD/DVD for my friends would be an infringement. Is there a difference between the ethicality of the two situations? (I don't see one). So, either (a) all the people who are in favor of free music availability reject the above premise or (b) I am missing something here. This has always puzzled me in the debate about making digital content available online. Sorry if this particular example has already been discussed to death.