Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 02:01:35 -0400 David Schultz d...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wed, May 30, 2012, Aldis Berjoza wrote: On Sat, 26 May 2012 22:45:37 +1200 Sam Lin sam.lin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi FreeBSD fellows, Those who are using LaTeX on FreeBSD must know that tetex has been discontinued years ago and that TeXLive is now recommended, however TeXLive has never been merged in the ports tree on FreeBSD and that tetex is still used on FreeBSD ports. Although there have been some customized work so that FreeBSD users can install and use TeXLive on FreeBSD machine (for example, http://code.google.com/p/freebsd-texlive/wiki/Installing), this is quite confusing and may still cause conflict on the system side when using or maintaining it. There has also been years of gossips that a Japanese developer Hiroki Sato (hrs@freebsd) has been working on this matter for the last years and therefore the FreeBSD admin panel don't want anyone else to work on this and merge it into the ports tree. I actually contacted Hiroki Sato in the beginning of last year (2011) regarding this, and in his reply he said that there had been several technical issues but most of them had been solved and almost ready to merge into the port tree, and that he was planning to go forward after the 8.2/7.4 releases (one or two weeks later from that time stage) are out. However, more than a year has passed since then and still nothing happened. I tried to contact him several times after that (email, tweet, etc) but haven't heard anything back from him at all. Is TeXLive really going to be merged into the FreeBSD ports tree as Hiroki Sato mentioned previously? Or is this just a myth?? I am now thinking that this should be put into the FreeBSD Project ideas List [http://wiki.freebsd.org/IdeasPage]. Regards, Sam Hey, Sam! I which TeXLive would be merged in FreeBSD ports. Romain is doing great job maintaining it. And it work, And it work now. In fact it works for more than a year. I have used his TeXLive ports through portshaker for a while. They work pretty well, but there are some issues due to the fact that the TeXLive folks have some strange ideas. For one, TeXLive is split into over 2000 packages, many of which are tiny; the FreeBSD package system doesn't handle that very well. For another, TeXLive now has its own (dubious) package manager, tlmgr, which doesn't play well with other package management systems. I'm not a ports committer, but perhaps a good first step to getting TeXLive working better in FreeBSD is to introduce a TeTeX vs TeXLive knob in the ports tree so that people don't wind up accidentally clobber their TeXLive install when TeTex gets pulled in as a dependency. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org When I was using Linux, my favourite distro was Gentoo. Packages on Gentoo are installed in a fashion very alike to FreeBSD - in fact, Gentoos portage was modeled after FreeBSD ports. In portage, there is a knob package_provided meaning that the package referenced as being provided is installed externally and that portage does not need to resolve said dependancy, as it is already there. I do not know of a similar FreeBSD-construct, but have really wished for something alike to stop the pulling in of the teTeX-tree. Cheers, -- Christopher TZ: GMT + 2h signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
On 21/06/2012 21:41, Christopher J. Ruwe wrote:
In portage, there is a knob package_provided meaning that the package
referenced as being provided is installed externally and that portage
does not need to resolve said dependancy, as it is already there.
I do not know of a similar FreeBSD-construct, but have really wished for
something alike to stop the pulling in of the teTeX-tree.
Ports sort of does this automatically. Some of the time. It depends on
how the port is written.
If you've got a dependency line like:
RUN_DEPENDS=fc-cache:${PORTSDIR}/x11-fonts/fontconfig
or
LIB_DEPENDS=expat:${PORTSDIR}/textproc/expat2
then in the first instance the ports will check for the existence of
fc-cache as an executable on $PATH, and in the second instance for
libexpat.so as a shared library known to ld.so(1). There's nothing to
say that either of those files should have been installed from the
ports, and you can install quite happily against a non-ports-installed
dependency. Ports management software like portmaster(8) or
portupgrade(8) can get confused by this and may try and install the
dependency from ports in some circumstances.
However, if you've got a dependency that looks like so:
BUILD_DEPENDS= p5-BerkeleyDB0:${PORTSDIR}/databases/p5-BerkeleyDB
ie. with or = and a version number, then the ports checks for the
installation of a package of at least the specified version. So in this
case, the ports has to be used to fulfil the dependency. (Perl module
dependencies are pretty much always done in this form nowadays in order
to avoid having to use ${SITE_PERL} in dependency lines.)
Cheers,
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
Hi all, Summary of below. I have started an effort to get TeXLive into the FreeBSD ports. See github.com/DragonSA/texlive for details. Volunteers welcome. On Sunday, 17 June 2012 22:04:15 David Schultz wrote: On Sun, Jun 17, 2012, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote: Even with a knob instead of checking if print/texlive-core is installed, it would put a lot of mess into the ports tree. Some maintainers will not agree to introduce these conditions, if there is no general agreement that we want to transition to TeXLive that way. teTeX hasn't been updated since 2006 and the maintainer of teTeX has discontinued development and recommends using TeXLive. Undoubtably updating the TeXLive will break some things but the same could be said about teTeX if an update existed. Are there any people who don't want to migrate to TeXLive? As far as I remember, both romain@ and hrs@ have stated that they do not want both teTeX and TeXLive in the tree concurrently. Looking through the list of bundled packages for TeXLive it will be quite difficult to have both TeXLive and teTeX in the tree concurrently. There are a group of support ports, such as xdvik and ptex that require special integration into either teTeX or TeXLive. To switch between either will require reinstalling many dependencies, not just the TeXLive or teTeX ports. With that said, it is not impossible nor, I think, will it impose a big maintenance burden. In that case, it sounds like using TeXLive in FreeBSD will be a bit tricky until someone steps in and does all the work required for integration. Unfortunately I'm a bit time-constrained for the next few months, but I do use TeXLive and would be happy to test any proposed patches. I have started working on just this, getting TeXLive into FreeBSD ports. It is still early days and I have only two monolithic ports, with texlive-base requiring lots of love. I believe my work is in a state ready for initial testing (verifying the ports) and some feedback. Some open questions are: - how to split texlive-texmf (OpenBSD has an approach) - how to handle bundled software that has existing (sometimes outdated) ports Also, I am looking for a sponsor: someone who will commit the ports when they are ready, and to provide feedback so that the ports may get to a ready state. For details about the project, and to get the ports, please see: github.com/DragonSA/texlive Regards P.S. I am not subscribed to freebsd-ports@ so please CC me. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
On Wed, May 30, 2012, Aldis Berjoza wrote: On Sat, 26 May 2012 22:45:37 +1200 Sam Lin sam.lin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi FreeBSD fellows, Those who are using LaTeX on FreeBSD must know that tetex has been discontinued years ago and that TeXLive is now recommended, however TeXLive has never been merged in the ports tree on FreeBSD and that tetex is still used on FreeBSD ports. Although there have been some customized work so that FreeBSD users can install and use TeXLive on FreeBSD machine (for example, http://code.google.com/p/freebsd-texlive/wiki/Installing), this is quite confusing and may still cause conflict on the system side when using or maintaining it. There has also been years of gossips that a Japanese developer Hiroki Sato (hrs@freebsd) has been working on this matter for the last years and therefore the FreeBSD admin panel don't want anyone else to work on this and merge it into the ports tree. I actually contacted Hiroki Sato in the beginning of last year (2011) regarding this, and in his reply he said that there had been several technical issues but most of them had been solved and almost ready to merge into the port tree, and that he was planning to go forward after the 8.2/7.4 releases (one or two weeks later from that time stage) are out. However, more than a year has passed since then and still nothing happened. I tried to contact him several times after that (email, tweet, etc) but haven't heard anything back from him at all. Is TeXLive really going to be merged into the FreeBSD ports tree as Hiroki Sato mentioned previously? Or is this just a myth?? I am now thinking that this should be put into the FreeBSD Project ideas List [http://wiki.freebsd.org/IdeasPage]. Regards, Sam Hey, Sam! I which TeXLive would be merged in FreeBSD ports. Romain is doing great job maintaining it. And it work, And it work now. In fact it works for more than a year. I have used his TeXLive ports through portshaker for a while. They work pretty well, but there are some issues due to the fact that the TeXLive folks have some strange ideas. For one, TeXLive is split into over 2000 packages, many of which are tiny; the FreeBSD package system doesn't handle that very well. For another, TeXLive now has its own (dubious) package manager, tlmgr, which doesn't play well with other package management systems. I'm not a ports committer, but perhaps a good first step to getting TeXLive working better in FreeBSD is to introduce a TeTeX vs TeXLive knob in the ports tree so that people don't wind up accidentally clobber their TeXLive install when TeTex gets pulled in as a dependency. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
On 06/17/2012 08:01, David Schultz wrote: On Wed, May 30, 2012, Aldis Berjoza wrote: I which TeXLive would be merged in FreeBSD ports. Romain is doing great job maintaining it. And it work, And it work now. In fact it works for more than a year. I have used his TeXLive ports through portshaker for a while. They work pretty well, but there are some issues due to the fact that the TeXLive folks have some strange ideas. For one, TeXLive is split into over 2000 packages, many of which are tiny; the FreeBSD package system doesn't handle that very well. For another, TeXLive now has its own (dubious) package manager, tlmgr, which doesn't play well with other package management systems. I'm not a ports committer, but perhaps a good first step to getting TeXLive working better in FreeBSD is to introduce a TeTeX vs TeXLive knob in the ports tree so that people don't wind up accidentally clobber their TeXLive install when TeTex gets pulled in as a dependency. I have been using Romain's TeXLive for almost a year, too. It is great, Romain does a good job and is very helpful, but it is definitely not ready for ports, yet. On machines not older than two years, the 500 to 600 ports that texlive-scheme-tetex is bearable, although it considerably slows down testing if all ports are up to date etc. Though it would like to have texlive-scheme-full, I have stopped using it for that reason. On older machines, even texlive-scheme-tetex adds a lot to port upgrading operations. The last time I checked, there still have been many broken links installed into bin. It is pretty easy to fix after installing the ports, but of course it should be done in the port, which at least does not seem to be trivial. Some other ports do not build because of this, for example with epstopdf missing. Quite a few conflicts and changes in dependencies are needed for TeXLive. TeXLive does not just replace teTeX, but also ports like freetype-tools, t1utils, jadetex, etc. I have patches for all ports I use, which has been working for me for half a year. If TeXLive and teTeX were supposed to exist in ports in parallel for some time, something like bsd.tex.mk would be needed with a generic way to specify tex related dependencies. Maybe this would be useful for the transition period, since we probably would not want texlive-scheme-tetex to replace all teTeX dependencies, but many people disagree that having both TeX at the same time in ports would be a good idea. There are ports that I could not get to build with TeXLive at all: misc/freebsd-doc-* There are too many error messages I do not understand. Someone with a lot more insight will have to look at these, before TeXLive can replace teTeX in ports. I have posted to texlive-free...@googlegroups.com about this, but there were no answers. I guess the biggest problem for people to put more effort into fixing TeXLive in FreeBSD ports is the huge disagreement about how a final solution should look like. OT: FreeBSD might be more behind than others, but others have trouble with TeXLive in their native packaging system, too: Nothing never than TeXLive 2009 made it into Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. Cheers, Jan Henrik ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote: Quite a few conflicts and changes in dependencies are needed for TeXLive. TeXLive does not just replace teTeX, but also ports like freetype-tools, t1utils, jadetex, etc. I have patches for all ports I use, which has been working for me for half a year. If TeXLive and teTeX were supposed to exist in ports in parallel for some time, something like bsd.tex.mk would be needed with a generic way to specify tex related dependencies. Maybe this would be useful for the transition period, since we probably would not want texlive-scheme-tetex to replace all teTeX dependencies, but many people disagree that having both TeX at the same time in ports would be a good idea. Right, so like I said, having the knob in the tree would be a useful first step, even if TeXLive isn't ready for inclusion. (I'd be surprised if there's a good reason to have multiple versions of things like t1utils, but that's a separate issue.) I guess the biggest problem for people to put more effort into fixing TeXLive in FreeBSD ports is the huge disagreement about how a final solution should look like. OT: FreeBSD might be more behind than others, but others have trouble with TeXLive in their native packaging system, too: Nothing never than TeXLive 2009 made it into Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. Yep, it's a giant mess. IIRC Ubuntu ships the most popular TeXLive schemas as separate packages. Doing anything more fine-grained than that seems unmanageable, especially since dependencies among TeXLive packages aren't tracked properly. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
On 06/17/2012 18:32, David Schultz wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
Quite a few conflicts and changes in dependencies are needed for
TeXLive. TeXLive does not just replace teTeX, but also ports like
freetype-tools, t1utils, jadetex, etc. I have patches for all ports I
use, which has been working for me for half a year. If TeXLive and teTeX
were supposed to exist in ports in parallel for some time, something
like bsd.tex.mk would be needed with a generic way to specify tex
related dependencies. Maybe this would be useful for the transition
period, since we probably would not want texlive-scheme-tetex to replace
all teTeX dependencies, but many people disagree that having both TeX at
the same time in ports would be a good idea.
Right, so like I said, having the knob in the tree would be a
useful first step, even if TeXLive isn't ready for inclusion.
(I'd be surprised if there's a good reason to have multiple
versions of things like t1utils, but that's a separate issue.)
I do not understand what you precisely mean with a knob as a useful
first step.
If we do not create a generic way to specify tex related dependencies
(USE_TEX=core t1utils tocloft), we need to decide that TeXLive will
eventually go into the tree the way Romain created the ports to be able
to depend on print/texlive-core, print/texlive-tocloft, etc.
Or what other way to introduce dependencies are you thinking about?
It is not possible to simply use print/texlive-core instead of
print/teTeX, not even print/texlive-scheme-tetex is enough as teTeX
includes more than that scheme currently gives. At the same time,
print/texlive-core replaces more than just print/teTeX: I have a list of
about 10 ports I had previously installed, which conflict with TeXLive
but have their functionality provided mostly by print/texlive-core as
far as I need it (except for building misc/freebsd-doc-*, which I cannot
fix).
For the ports I use, I have patches that introduce dependencies like
this one in devel/doxygen:
.if exists(${LOCALBASE}/share/texmf/scripts/texlive/tlmgr.pl)
BUILD_DEPENDS+=
texlive-scheme-tetex=0:${PORTSDIR}/print/texlive-scheme-tetex \
${LOCALBASE}/share/texmf-dist/tex/latex/tocloft/tocloft.sty:${PORTSDIR}/print/texlive-tocloft
.else
BUILD_DEPENDS+=dvips:${PORTSDIR}/print/dvipsk-tetex \
latex:${PORTSDIR}/print/teTeX
.endif
Even with a knob instead of checking if print/texlive-core is installed,
it would put a lot of mess into the ports tree. Some maintainers will
not agree to introduce these conditions, if there is no general
agreement that we want to transition to TeXLive that way.
As far as I remember, both romain@ and hrs@ have stated that they do not
want both teTeX and TeXLive in the tree concurrently.
Cheers,
Jan Henrik
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012, Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote: Even with a knob instead of checking if print/texlive-core is installed, it would put a lot of mess into the ports tree. Some maintainers will not agree to introduce these conditions, if there is no general agreement that we want to transition to TeXLive that way. As far as I remember, both romain@ and hrs@ have stated that they do not want both teTeX and TeXLive in the tree concurrently. In that case, it sounds like using TeXLive in FreeBSD will be a bit tricky until someone steps in and does all the work required for integration. Unfortunately I'm a bit time-constrained for the next few months, but I do use TeXLive and would be happy to test any proposed patches. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
Enviat des del meu iTotxo (disculpeu la brevetat) Sent from my iBrick (excuse me for the brief message) Quite a few conflicts and changes in dependencies are needed for TeXLive. TeXLive does not just replace teTeX, but also ports like freetype-tools, t1utils, jadetex, etc. I have patches for all ports I use, which has been working for me for half a year. If TeXLive and teTeX were supposed to exist in ports in parallel for some time, something like bsd.tex.mk would be needed with a generic way to specify tex related dependencies. Maybe this would be useful for the transition period, since we probably would not want texlive-scheme-tetex to replace all teTeX dependencies, but many people disagree that having both TeX at the same time in ports would be a good idea. There are ports that I could not get to build with TeXLive at all: misc/freebsd-doc-* There are too many error messages I do not understand. Someone with a lot more insight will have to look at these, before TeXLive can replace teTeX in ports. I have posted to texlive-free...@googlegroups.com about this, but there were no answers. I guess the biggest problem for people to put more effort into fixing TeXLive in FreeBSD ports is the huge disagreement about how a final solution should look like. OT: FreeBSD might be more behind than others, but others have trouble with TeXLive in their native packaging system, too: Nothing never than TeXLive 2009 made it into Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. Cheers, Jan Henrik ___ One (among others) problems is the TL nanescheme. They don't release packages with version number. Because of that maintaining the distinfo of thousands of packages is quite difficult. Then I'd vote for keeping an old version of the TL tarballs (like ubuntu does) in the FreeBSD FTP distfiles dir and proceed with fixing the ports needing teTeX. I did for gnome2 sometime ago and wasn't that for most of the gnome2 packages. I would like to help if this patch is taken. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
On Sat, 26 May 2012 22:45:37 +1200 Sam Lin sam.lin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi FreeBSD fellows, Those who are using LaTeX on FreeBSD must know that tetex has been discontinued years ago and that TeXLive is now recommended, however TeXLive has never been merged in the ports tree on FreeBSD and that tetex is still used on FreeBSD ports. Although there have been some customized work so that FreeBSD users can install and use TeXLive on FreeBSD machine (for example, http://code.google.com/p/freebsd-texlive/wiki/Installing), this is quite confusing and may still cause conflict on the system side when using or maintaining it. There has also been years of gossips that a Japanese developer Hiroki Sato (hrs@freebsd) has been working on this matter for the last years and therefore the FreeBSD admin panel don't want anyone else to work on this and merge it into the ports tree. I actually contacted Hiroki Sato in the beginning of last year (2011) regarding this, and in his reply he said that there had been several technical issues but most of them had been solved and almost ready to merge into the port tree, and that he was planning to go forward after the 8.2/7.4 releases (one or two weeks later from that time stage) are out. However, more than a year has passed since then and still nothing happened. I tried to contact him several times after that (email, tweet, etc) but haven't heard anything back from him at all. Is TeXLive really going to be merged into the FreeBSD ports tree as Hiroki Sato mentioned previously? Or is this just a myth?? I am now thinking that this should be put into the FreeBSD Project ideas List [http://wiki.freebsd.org/IdeasPage]. Regards, Sam Hey, Sam! I which TeXLive would be merged in FreeBSD ports. Romain is doing great job maintaining it. And it work, And it work now. In fact it works for more than a year. -- Aldis Berjoza signature.asc Description: PGP signature
TeXLive merge into FreeBSD ports tree - FreeBSD project idea
Hi FreeBSD fellows, Those who are using LaTeX on FreeBSD must know that tetex has been discontinued years ago and that TeXLive is now recommended, however TeXLive has never been merged in the ports tree on FreeBSD and that tetex is still used on FreeBSD ports. Although there have been some customized work so that FreeBSD users can install and use TeXLive on FreeBSD machine (for example, http://code.google.com/p/freebsd-texlive/wiki/Installing), this is quite confusing and may still cause conflict on the system side when using or maintaining it. There has also been years of gossips that a Japanese developer Hiroki Sato (hrs@freebsd) has been working on this matter for the last years and therefore the FreeBSD admin panel don't want anyone else to work on this and merge it into the ports tree. I actually contacted Hiroki Sato in the beginning of last year (2011) regarding this, and in his reply he said that there had been several technical issues but most of them had been solved and almost ready to merge into the port tree, and that he was planning to go forward after the 8.2/7.4 releases (one or two weeks later from that time stage) are out. However, more than a year has passed since then and still nothing happened. I tried to contact him several times after that (email, tweet, etc) but haven't heard anything back from him at all. Is TeXLive really going to be merged into the FreeBSD ports tree as Hiroki Sato mentioned previously? Or is this just a myth?? I am now thinking that this should be put into the FreeBSD Project ideas List [http://wiki.freebsd.org/IdeasPage]. Regards, Sam ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
