Sender: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:36:41 +0000 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=windows-1252 |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On 25/03/2015 21:52, Karl Berry wrote:
> Sigh. Again: my point is that one way is verifiable and debuggable, the
> other is not. If all that's stated is "7.0.0", and a user's result is
> different, there is no way for the user to know if it's because Unicode
> released two different files under that version number, there was an
> error in the download, something changed or went wrong in the LaTeX
> processing code, or ... who knows what.
>
> With a factual, verifiable, piece of information about the input files
> used, any problem can be easily diagnosed, instead of having to be
> guessed at.
>
> (Not that it's likely to matter in practice, I grant you.)
This is done using pdfTeX's \pdfmdfivesum. I won't get a snapshot done
today but will in the morning: check DropBox in about 12 hours!
--
Joseph Wright
|
|
|