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: flux <flux AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] latex missing from texlive
  • Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 08:09:45 +0900

Sukneet Basuta (sukneet AT gmail.com) wrote [11.09.10 02:49]:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 5:12 AM, flux <flux AT sourcemage.org> wrote:
> > Did you try ConTeXt MkII, or only MkIV? Note that MkIV is
> > LuaTeX-specific and won't work with other TeX engines, while MkII is
> > older but should work fine with pdftex, xetex, etc.
> >
>
> MkII seems to rely on luatex as well. I know that seems odd, but
> running texexec just gives me "/usr/bin/env: texlua: No such file or
> directory." I'm guess it requires luatex to start things.

There are options to texexec for using different tex engines. Perhaps
they changed the default tex engine from pdftex to luatex. Can you try
running it with --pdftex or --xetex (or whatever the options are if they
have changed, man texexec should tell you). Also, it's possible that the
script to run ConTeXt (even for MkII) changed to "context" rather than
"texexec" (though I have doubts for this).

Does luatex actually get installed by texlive? If so, perhaps we can
hunt down whatever config value is causing ConTeXt to not find it. If
it's not being installed, perhaps we can fix INSTALL to make it install
it (perhaps optionally so via CONFIGURE?).

> Is there some reason why TEXMFSYSCONFIG is set to
> /usr/share/texmf-config in texmf.cnf? We specify
> sysconfdir=${INSTALL_ROOT}/etc in BUILD, but don't seem to use it.
> Technically to be FHS compliant it should really be stored in
> /etc/texmf or something like that. Most distros seem to have
> TEXMFSYSCONFIG set to /etc/texmf . I suppose if it is changed now,
> users who have their *-sys files in /usr/share/texmf-config will have
> to copy it over to /etc, but we can easily make sorcery do that for
> us. Thoughts? Should I change it or leave it?
>
> TEXMFLOCAL should also be set to /usr/local/share/texmf rather than
> /usr/share/texmf-local to be FHS compliant. But we'll have the same
> problem if users already have local additions to
> /usr/share/texmf-local .

In fact, the good old tetex used /usr/local/share/texmf, and I prefer
that method myself. I don't really like the texlive way of handling
things, but I guess I'm just old-school. However, TeX and FHS don't
really go together in all respects. TEXMFSYSCONFIG is not actually
"config" files in the sense of what would typically go in /etc (in my
own /usr/share/texmf-conf, it is currently completely empty except for a
single ls-R file generated automatically by texhash/mktexlsr). The real
config file is texmf.cnf (and others in /usr/share/texmf/web2c/), and
that *must* reside in the system texmf tree. TeX wasn't designed when
FHS existed, and indeed runs on systems other than linux, so it uses its
own notion of directory locations via kpathsea (kpsewhich and etc.), and
the tex engines use this to find all their necessary files, including
texmf.cnf. Changing tex to really use /etc would require hacking it
quite a bit. In other words, setting TEXMFSYSCONFIG=/etc/texmf would
only be purely cosmetic and not really achieve any compliance.

--
Justin "flux_control" Boffemmyer
Cauldron wizard and general mage
Source Mage GNU/Linux
http://www.sourcemage.org

Attachment: pgpfEJMKSDLNB.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page