Obsolete TeX ports

[Takanori Yamamoto]

> (Incidentally, pTeX itself is also available in texlive, with the
> texlive-lang-cjk port, but I haven't tried it myself.)

pTeX in TeX Live 2010 works well in many cases.
I believe most of pTeX users can shift to TeX Live 2010.

Strictly speaking, pTeX in TeX Live 2010 is not upper compatible
with port:pTeX. For instances,

 - texlive-lang-cjk doesn't contain pLaTeX 2.09 due to its license issues.
   That is, TeX Live 2010 cannot handle Japanese LaTeX 2.09 documents.
   (see also: canna +pdfdoc)

 - otf.sty is not installed.
   It's a technical problem. VF files in otf.sty cannot be compiled with
   ovp2ovf 2.1 yet.

 - updmap(-sys) doesn't have KanjiMap features.
 - xdvi cannot preview Japanese DVI files.

So I guess some dyed-in-the-wool TeX users will still keep using port:pTeX.



> Some examples that have come up recently
> are revtex (#27709) and tex-mh (#27795). It looks like most of the
> tex-* ports fall into this category too.
> 
> I'm inclined to go through these and mark the abandoned ones as
> replaced_by the appropriate texlive port. This would ensure we'd have a
> reasonably up-to-date version. Are there any objections to this?

> teTeX is sufficiently obsolete itself
> that we probably shouldn't expend any effort worrying about it, but
> pTeX is still used. Not sure if this will be an issue for ptex users?


Originally, to use imaxima with pTeX I wrote tex-mh port. Because pTeX doesn't
have breqn.
How about change the port name from tex-mh to ptex-mh to avoid the confusion?

I was also using tex-tipa, tex-cm-super, tex-utopia and tex-fourier-gutenberg.
If I can, I'd like to change these names to ptex-* in the same way as.


I don't have any idea about revtex.