At Fri, 14 Jan 2011 23:48:36 +0100,
Martin Costabel wrote:
>
> On 14/01/11 09:32 , Tomoaki Okayama wrote:
> > I imported a patch from MacPorts, which disables Carbon API.
> > https://trac.macports.org/ticket/25316
> >
> > How does it work for you?
>
> Indeed, with this, texlive rev. test10 builds OK for me on 10.6.6.
>
> The installation, however, did not succeed immediately. The error looked
> as follows:
>
> ...
> ! e-TeX fatal error: this file can be processed only in extended mode;
> did you perhaps forget the asterisk?
> Error: `luatex -ini -jobname=luatex -progname=luatex luatex.ini' failed
> fmtutil: running `mf-nowin -ini -jobname=mf -progname=mf
> -translate-file=cp227.tcx mf.ini' ...
> [...]
> This is a summary of all `failed' messages:
> `luatex -ini -jobname=lualatex -progname=lualatex lualatex.ini' failed
> `luatex -ini -jobname=luatex -progname=luatex luatex.ini' failed
> /sw/bin/dpkg: error processing texlive-base (--install):
> subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
> dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of texlive:
> texlive depends on texlive-base (= 0.20100722-0test10); however:
> Package texlive-base is not configured yet.
>
> So this is *again* a problem with fmtutil.cnf. Unfortunately, fmtutil
> does not say which file it is using. It turns out that this time it was
> not the one in ~/.texmf-var (I don't have any ~/.tex* directory on this
> machine), but the one in /sw/share/texmf-dist/web2c/. This file belongs
> to the package texlive-texmf. As it happens, I had not yet updated
> texlive-texmf, and the dependency list for texlive allows an older
> version of texlive-texmf. After updating texlive-texmf to 0.20100722,
> texlive-base installed OK.
>
I see, I added Depends: texlive-texmf (>= %v). Thank you.
> I do not understand why one needs several copies of fmtutil.cnf at all.
>
I believe texlive always uses only one fmtutil.cnf. If you want
to know which one is used, 'kpsewhich fmtutil.cnf' gives the answer.
It is determined by a priority of texmf paths, described in
/sw/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf . To be more precise, this line:
TEXMF =
{$TEXMFCONFIG,$TEXMFVAR,$TEXMFHOME,!!$TEXMFSYSCONFIG,!!$TEXMFSYSVAR,!!$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFDIST}
TeX Live's default setting is stored in TEXMFDIST, and Fink's
default setting is stored in TEXMFMAIN, and editted setting is
stored in TEXMFLOCAL, TEXMFCONFIG, and so on.
You can overwrite system's setting by not modifying the
original file (and MUST NOT MODIFY), but putting a editted file
on a higher-priority path. This is teTeX's and TeX Live's policy.
So you may see there are several copies of the same name.
> As to the Carbon-free xetex, maybe one could impose it only for
> 10.6/64bit, that is, condition the patch lines with "if [ %m = 'x86_64' ]"?
>
Right, I also added the conditional branching.
Seems all ok now?
Tomoaki Okayama
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks
Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand
malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you
can protect your company and customers by using code signing.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
