Kevin Kofler wrote:
> but also programs like kdvi, which seems to me a completely
unnecessary
> replacement for xdvi, which always works perfectly for me.
Actually, KDvi is dead, it's part of Okular these days. As for
xdvi,
that's completely obsolete and uses some ancient toolkit that looks like
crap (AFAIK, there's actually a choice between Xaw, Xaw3D and Motif, the
current Fedora package is built against Xaw3D). I think it's great that
you can view DVIs in Okular and I don't see the point of using an ancient
Xaw or Motif app instead.
Well, xdvi works fine for me, and brings up the TeX/LaTeX page
much faster than okular.
Last time I tried, okular (or maybe kdvi) did not bring out
Postscript embedded in .dvi files properly;
but that was some time ago.
Personally, I don't see any advantage in one program
being able to do a lot of different things.
Processing a .dvi file seems to me a very specific requirement,
and I actually prefer a program that "does one thing, and does it well",
as Ken Thompson said.
I also find xpdf is much faster than Adobe's PDF reader,
though that is a slightly different issue.
I also use Konqueror as my main browser (i.e. at least 99% of the
time I
browse the web).
I guess I don't share the KDE philosophy,
which seems to be to re-invent the wheel as kwheel.
Unless there is actually something wrong with firefox,
it seems to me simpler to use a program available
on all the systems I know.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: gayleard /at/
eircom.net
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland