Discussion:
TLCore packages
(too old to reply)
t***@schoepfer.info
2017-10-02 15:32:19 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

when compiling from source, tools like a2ping,afm2pl + accompaniment
files ... are installed, which is all fine for binary files.
These packages(including their accompaniment files) also exist in the
netarchives, in texlive.tlpdb tagged as TLCore, but there are also
packages(e.g. hyphen-packages) tagged as TLCore which are not present in
the texlive source tarball.
For packagers, the accompaniment files are partly overlapping, as the
netarchive from some packages have not the same content/filenames.

I'm looking for a way to use either the accompaniment files from
sourceinstall or from the netarchive.
Just overwriting with netarchive files may lead to unused files or
duplicated files.
Thanks for any hints.

Btw. a2ping from the source tarball does not install the manpage, which
is present in a2ping.doc.tar.xz

Johannes
Karl Berry
2017-10-02 22:21:47 UTC
Permalink
Hi Johannes,

Yes, there is overlap between Master and Build. Yes, this is bad.
No, there is no ideal solution at present. Sorry.

I doubt the "TLCore" category perfectly reflects anything. All those
categories really do is define the default patterns for file inclusions
in the package. Don't take them seriously.

I do advise overwriting/extracting from Master. That should be fine for
all package files, because Master is what we distribute. Build is
essentially development sources, so has all the usual attributes of
instability, quick changes, lack of testing, etc.

The a2ping man page, among others, does not exist in the upstream source
repo (or at least did not, last time I checked for updates). Therefore
it is not in Build, but since it is still useful to distribute, I
include it in the Master man pages. (If you want it in the sources too,
talk to the program maintainer(s), I can't undertake that.)

Sorry I don't have better news, but that's the reality. -k
Norbert Preining
2017-10-02 22:47:18 UTC
Permalink
Hi Johannes,

to add to what Karl has said, here a short list of things I do in
Debian where I use the Build/source hierarchy for building "binary"
packages and use the Master (or in fact tlnet checkout) for building
the "arch=all" architecture independent packages.

To avoid duplication of files installed from the one and the other
several things has to be done *after* the staged installation but
before packing up. This is the *Debian* way but not all of it is
necessary. I prefer having all the arch=all (architecture independent)
files as much as possible in the arch=all packages, and keep the
arch=any package containing mostly only actual binaries.
(Mostly because I update arch=all more often, arch=any practically never)

In the texlive-bin (from Build/source) package(s):
- remove all of shared directory (texlive/texmf*)
- remove several man pages (latex, pdflatex, ....)
- remove tex4ht links in bin
- remote all the files and links installed by
Build/source/texk/texlive/tl_scripts
(see below)

In the texlive-nonbin (from tlnet/Master) packages:
- add the files from
Build/source/texk/texlive/tl_scripts
(see scripts.lst file)

It all needed a bit of iterations, but well, that is what I came up for
Debian and it is running since about 10 years in this style.

All the best

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. + JAIST + TeX Live + Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13 fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13
t***@schoepfer.info
2017-10-04 09:15:59 UTC
Permalink
Hi Norbert and Karl,

Thanks for your infos, much appreciated.
Post by Norbert Preining
- remove all of shared directory (texlive/texmf*)
- remove several man pages (latex, pdflatex, ....)
- remove tex4ht links in bin
- remote all the files and links installed by
Build/source/texk/texlive/tl_scripts
(see below)
- add the files from
Build/source/texk/texlive/tl_scripts
(see scripts.lst file)
Are there "wrong" links in bin especially with tex4ht, or is it about to
remove any link in bin, which later on, after tlnet additions, will
generated the correct way by "make texlinks"?
Or do you do no "make texlinks" at all and generate the links in bin in
another way?

Johannes
Norbert Preining
2017-10-04 11:26:34 UTC
Permalink
Hi Johannes,
Post by t***@schoepfer.info
Post by Norbert Preining
- remove tex4ht links in bin
Are there "wrong" links in bin especially with tex4ht, or is it about to
remove any link in bin, which later on, after tlnet additions, will
generated the correct way by "make texlinks"?
I don't use texlinks at all, but the links are contained in the
packages I install from tlnet.

In principle *everything* is in the tlnet checkout packages, but on
Debian I *am not allowed* to use the precompiled binaries, but need
to compile them myself.

I use the scripts.lst from the Build/source when building the
arch=all (arch independent) packages to create the links of tex4ht
and all the others.

The reason is I don't want to ship in
texlive-binaries
(which is the arch=any) dangling symlinks
/usr/bin/foobar -> ../share/texlive/texmf-dist/scripts/foobar/foobar.pl
etc. The files under texmf-dist are shipped by the arch=all packages, so
the actual links in /usr/bin should be shipped in the same package.

Thus, I reuse the scripts.lst from Build/source to create the links in
the arch=all, and remove the (dangling) symlinks when building the
arch=any binaries.

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. + JAIST + TeX Live + Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13 fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13
Loading...