On Oct 13, 2017, at 03:56, Joël Brogniart wrote: > I maintain two local ports for tools that use Latex (dblatex and > auto-multiple-choice). These tools could either use Latex from MacPorts' > TexLive or another Latex installation so they have a variant for a non > Macports Latex. > > For these tool be used with Latex, some parts should be installed in the > Latex hierarchy. There is no problem with MacPorts installation of TexLive, > but with an external installation, the install phase should access to tools > (mktexlsr and mtxrun) that are not in the MacPorts path. > > For now, I modify the binpath variable in the macports.conf file to add the > path for the binaries of the external latex installation.
Last I heard, this is what we recommend. Add the external LaTeX installation's path to binpath. Ports that use LaTeX binaries should declare their dependencies on the appropriate texlive port using the "bin:<binaryname>:" prefix instead of the "port:" prefix so that if an external LaTeX is installed, the corresponding MacPorts texlive port won't get installed. > As there is a community of users of theses tools, I put online instructions > for the installation > <https://project.auto-multiple-choice.net/projects/auto-multiple-choice/wiki/Installing_AMC_development_version_on_macOS_with_a_non_MacPorts_LaTeX_installation> > (instruction are to be updated). > > Another option would be to link the external binaries in the Macports > hierarchy. > > What do you think is the best solution, modifying the binpath variable or add > links to the MacPorts hierarchy? Or are there better alternatives? > > I have another question. I could submit new version of these ports to > MacPorts with default variant working with TexLive installation of MacPorts > and a -latex variant not depending on a MacPorts TexLive installation. That > would greatly improve the installation process and instructions. But the > -latex variant may require hacks from users who want to install it. Is this > acceptable for a port? >
