Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] latex missing from texlive

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Sukneet Basuta <sukneet AT gmail.com>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] latex missing from texlive
  • Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:27:21 -0400

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:27 PM, flux <flux AT sourcemage.org> wrote:
> I'd rather like to know what texlinks is doing and perhaps we should do
> that ourselves. If all it's doing is setting up symlinks, why does there
> need to be an entirely separate binary for this? Why not just ln -s?
> This seems rather fishy. However, we definitely need to fix the INSTALL
> to do the right thing. I also have a feeling that this only affects
> latex/pdflatex (and possibly tex), but I'm not so sure about this. I'm
> fairly sure, though, that this doesn't affect context (which has it's
> own wrappers).

texlinks certainly does more than just make symlinks. I'm not sure of
the full extent however. On my install it changed some config settings
that messed up texlive, but that was due to using an unmodified
fmtutil.cnf. I believe it's properly patched when the spell is cast.

Gentoo seems to make the symlinks themselves rather than use texlinks.
See
http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/eclass/texlive-common.eclass
(etexlinks). So does OpenBSD
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/~checkout~/ports/print/texlive/base/Makefile?rev=1.50;content-type=text%2Fplain
(post-install).

If texlinks is the proper upstream way to do it, I suggest we stick
with that provided we can get it working properly.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page