Hi,

Thank you for your comment.

2014-05-19 16:43 GMT+09:00 Danai SAE-HAN (韓達耐) <danai.sae-...@edpnet.be>:

> Hi Zephyrus
>
> I have been trying to unravel the exact problem you are facing, and it
> seems that the problem has more to do with the way that Debian
> packages got installed, and that some of the post-installation steps
> did not go into error mode.
>

Yes, I agree. It looks that my piece-meal installation of TeX packages
using aptitude (or apt-get) may have encountered a missing dependency or
maybe uncovered a situation where
a failing command did not stop apt-get/aptitude as failure eventually.


> However, this bug thread has become a bit convoluted.  To clear up
> things, I would like you to answer a number of questions.
>
> Yes, I wil ltry.


> 1. Does pTeX run fine when you parse your minimal TeX document under
> user "root"?  (BTW, I am not advocating this as your normal process;
> please run TeX binaries under a normal user account for regular use.)
>

It does. Oh, wait, that was now under an ordinary account.
Let me check now under superuser:

root@vm-debian-amd64:/tmp# ptex foo.tex
This is pTeX, Version 3.1415926-p3.4 (utf8.euc) (TeX Live 2013/Debian)
 restricted \write18 enabled.
(./foo.tex [1] )
Output written on foo.dvi (1 page, 212 bytes).
Transcript written on foo.log.
root@vm-debian-amd64:/tmp#

So, it works under superuser.

2. As Norbert has suggested, please run "dpkg -l tex-common" under user
> "root".
>

I am quoting it here again, and it looks OK (that is a problem from the
viewpoint of debugger. I wish it is not installed properly, but according
to dpkg it is, and this is consistent of my observation that
aptitude/apt-get succeeded as far as I could tell.)

 dpkg -l tex-common
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
|
Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name               Version        Architecture   Description
+++-==================-==============-==============-==========================================
ii  tex-common         4.04           all            common infrastructure
for building and ins



> 3. Space issues and appropriate error traps can perhaps be
> accommodated by the CJK packages, TeXlive packages or even the dpkg
> packages.  But I need to understand a bit more about your current
> setup, and if packages were upgraded according to a process that is
> not out of the ordinary.
> Can you please summarise your installation / upgrade path?
>
> I am using testing repository on top of the stable repository.
I am quoting my /etc/apt/sources.list here again. Other than that, there is
nothing special.

---- /etc/apt/sources.list
#

# deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 7.1.0 _Wheezy_ - Official amd64 NETINST
Binary-1 20130615-23:04]/ wheezy main

#deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux 7.1.0 _Wheezy_ - Official amd64 NETINST
Binary-1 20130615-23:04]/ wheezy main

deb http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ wheezy main
deb http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ testing main
deb-src http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ wheezy main

deb http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates main
deb-src http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates main

# wheezy-updates, previously known as 'volatile'
deb http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ wheezy-updates main
deb-src http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ wheezy-updates main
--- end of /etc/apt/sources.list

However, do note that I tend to
install smaller TeX packages first individually (and let aptitude / apt-get
handle the dependency.
This is to save as much space as possible in my installed linux image.
(Although I tried to create large enough /usr and /var, I am afraid that
after so many packages
and larger packages lately, I am running out of the space now.
That is why, I mentioned texlive-lang-cjk was split into C-part, J-part and
K-part back in 2012 and so I could save space by not installing C-part and
did not have to load the largish Chinese font.
Also, a doc package from TeXlive was a separate and independent package
back in 2012 and thus I could remove it without aptitude/apt-get
complaining. This saved another few hundred MB (!).


> The system always reserves some space on the hard disk for user root.
> When your disk is 99.9xx% full, processes run under regular users will
> face problems, but user root still has a bit of space left.  However,
> "dpkg" is also run under user root, so my guess is that your disk was
> temporarily 100% full, and that some errors may not have been trapped.
>

After reading Norbert's comments now, I think this could be it.
So the tough part was  "some errors may not have been trapped".
I wish all such errors were trapped.
Any idea how I could check this locally as new packages come out?

TIA

 Thank you.

Thank you again. My bug report boils down that
there seem to be one or few commands that fail to report back the error
properly to invoking process when the execution failed due to low-space
conditions. But nobody including the reporter is sure when such errors
occured during installation. Oh well.


> --
> Danai
>

Reply via email to