Hello,
I downloaded the luahbtex binary(A) from ConTeXt Bulid farm
https://build.contextgarden.net/#/builders/40/builds/144 and I compared
it with the binary(B) from TeXlive pretest 2026. The result: the
binary(A) is OK, the processing time is comparable with luahbtex from
TeXlive 2025. The biary(B) is slower (almost two times) as I reported
before.
Applying file command to binary(A):
luahbtex: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV),
dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2,
BuildID[sha1]=cc9bfc6319593228d3f0cf7142c796c3d55b3746, for GNU/Linux
2.6.32, stripped
Applyinf file command to binary(B)
luahbtex: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV),
dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2,
BuildID[sha1]=6f438fa29895e28d3a33aa6b9d61cd97a125c6d4, for GNU/Linux
3.2.0, stripped
ls -lh luahbtex (binary(A))
-rwxr-xr-x 1 olsak olsak 9.1M Feb 15 14:29 luahbtex
ls -lh luahbtex (binary(B))
-rwxr-xr-x 1 olsak olsak 15M Feb 11 22:49 luahbtex
Note: 9MB versus 15MB.
It seems that the problem is related to settings of compilation
environment when a binary is built. So, it is not your problem but
problem of TeXlive. On the other hand, we should report this problem to
TeXlive because binaries from TeXlive are (probably) most used among TeX
users.
Petr O.
On 2/15/26 13:30, Petr Olsak wrote:
Sorry, I didn't specify my desktop environment. I am using binary from
x86_64-linux from TeXlive.
Petr
On 2/15/26 12:25, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
On windows it looks ok, the speed is similar or a bit faster on the
documents I tried.
_______________________________________________
dev-luatex mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
dev-luatex mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
