Am 17.04.20 um 17:00 schrieb Troy Dawson:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 7:07 AM Leon Fauster <[email protected]> wrote:
I am unsure if this is something for RHEL8 or EPEL8:
The usage in EL8 of
pandoc --pdf-engine=xelatex
pandoc --pdf-engine=lualatex
is broken.
Because EL8 doesn't provide texlive-ucharcat-%{VERSION}.rpm
I already opened a ticket here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820194
Not much we can do about pandoc, because it is in RHEL8.
texlive-* packages ... sorry ... scary nightmare after looking at the
spec file for that.
Technically, I believe we could have some type of epel-only texlive-*
package(s) as long as the source rpm isn't the same name as texlive.
But trust me when I say, I won't touch that with a 10 foot pole. I
will run screaming if it's even in the same building as me.
But if others want to try, as long as things don't conflict. I know
there are many texlive-* packages not in RHEL8.
My understanding is that such EPEL8 packages are build outside of
texlive-base-%VERSION.src.rpm or texlive-%VERSION.src.rpm source
packages, for EPEL8 its an texlive-extension package. Than Ngo has
build the initial EPEL8 src.rpm package [1]. Maybe this is less a
nightmare.
Fedora:
rpm -q --qf '%{NAME}|%{SOURCERPM}|%{VENDOR}\n' texlive-lacheck
texlive-ucharcat
texlive-lacheck|texlive-base-20190410-8.fc31.src.rpm|Fedora Project
texlive-ucharcat|texlive-2019-19.fc31.src.rpm|Fedora Project
RHEL8
rpm -q --qf '%{NAME}|%{SOURCERPM}|%{VENDOR}\n' texlive-lacheck
texlive-lacheck|texlive-extension-20180414-2.el8.src.rpm|Fedora Project
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1785439
--
Thanks,
Leon
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
