Re: texconfig action and site-wide changes
Hi Frank, It seems to me that texconfig-sys init should call fmtutil-sys and updmap-sys, too, not fmtutil and updmap plain - I didn't check for texlinks.] That is wrong, just try texconfig-sys formats change some bits in the config file (-goes via fmtutil --edit to TEXMFSYSCONFIG) and the changed/added formats to via fmtutil --byfmt to TEXMFSYSVAR). The environment manipulation done in texconfig-sys has of course not only some effect on the texconfig script that it calls, but also to all other subprocesses. I have tried to understand how texconfig works if a user invokes it. As far as I can see, for every configuration file they touch, a copy is generated in TEXMFCONFIG (which is $HOME/.texmf-config by default). Right. This seems to have the (probably unwanted effect) that the user is thus cut-off from site-wide changes. The same is true if some user puts a custom copy of koma-script into his $TEXMFHOME. If a user changes a configuration file $cfile for the first time, the changed file after check_out is not only copied or cat'ed to $TEXMFCONFIG/$relDir/$cfile, but additionally a diff or the change regex Well, this sounds like a complicated solution (different config files would need different kind of updates) with a questionable effect. Thomas
Re: cygwin: lilypond and tetex-3.0
Thomas Esser writes: Hmm. Maybe, in texmf.cnf, TEXMFVAR must be added to SYSTEXMF SYSTEXMF works for what it is good for: to decide if some font source comes from a system tree. Texmf.cnf says about SYSTEXMF % The system trees. These are the trees that are shared by all the users. The font cache (VARTEXFONTS) is set to /var/cache/fonts. Don't list TEXMFVAR in SYSTEXMF. Why must TEXMFVAR (=/var/lib/texmf) drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 2004-12-20 22:47 /var/lib/texmf drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2004-12-27 17:39 /var/lib/texmf/web2c/ a read-only tree for all users, not be part of SYSTEXMF? Why is this bad? It seemed to work, and it is what Debian does too. Can you suggest a better variable to add TEXMFVAR to? I often look at Debian's solutions, as they are usually quite good at following and implementing the FHS. This is the sort of decision that I'm quite uncomfortable about. I would like to keep upstream's defaults, but I also want to have a standards compliant system. Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org
Re: cygwin: lilypond and tetex-3.0
Frank Küster writes: Maybe SYSTEXMF should be renamed to TEXMFSYSFONTS? Hm, which version of teTeX in Debian do you mean? For the 3.0 packages, neither TEXMFVAR nor TEXMFSYSVAR will be in TEXMFSYS. Ah, I see, there were some major changes after 2.99.7 that I haven't introduced into my texmf.cnf. I did not expect any changes and did not check for them. I will have a careful look into this. To be bold, this unbelievable flexibility confuses me. I am wondering what the plusses are to have a more complex texmf.cnf than say, for root CONFIG: /etc/texmf/ STATIC: /usr/share/texmf/ DYNAMIC: /var/lib/texmf/ and for users FONTS:/var/cache/fonts/ Then duplicate the lot for the user's $HOME directory. I have not yet, as a packager nor as user, felt the need for much more than that. Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org
Re: texconfig action and site-wide changes
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Thomas Esser wrote: Did you notice that the table of contents of the INSTALL file is still: Yes, I noticed it when I looked it up today. Unfortunately, I did not notice it before the release. :-( Nor any of the testers! Microsoft has the advantage that they can hire someone who has never used a product and ask them to try installing it during testing. TeTeX testers tend to be experienced so most probably didn't bother reading INSTALL. It would be nice to get a few people who are new to TeX involved in testing. -- George N. White III [EMAIL PROTECTED]
