From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Apr 5 18:24:54 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from hotmail.com (f3.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 043CD37B41A for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 18:24:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 18:24:45 -0800 Received: from 63.198.196.28 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 06 Apr 2002 02:24:45 GMT X-Originating-IP: [63.198.196.28] From: "Camille Zavala" To: tg@melaten.rwth-aachen.de Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: teTeX port (Re: bug in noweb 2.9a port under 4.5-stable) Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 18:24:45 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Apr 2002 02:24:45.0493 (UTC) FILETIME=[3797CE50:01C1DD12] Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org a local texmf tree would be a Right Decision. my perspective is from the end user's viewpoint. if a normal user installs teTeX and then noweb, he/she would expect the noweb macros to be installed into the existing TeX system. i solved my problem with a symlink in the latex directory. couldn't the installation script do a -d test at post-install time, then copy or link the files into the right directory? i'm thinking of something like: if [ -d $tetex_directory ] then ln -s $noweb_tex_macros $tetex_directory/noweb elif [ -d $plain_tex_directory ] then ln -s $noweb_tex_macros $plain_tex_directory/noweb fi freebsd seems to offer two ports of tex: teTeX and tex-3.14159. but the tex port doesn't offer LaTeX, so noweb users wouldn't have that. if you're getting noweb as a port, teTeX is the only game in town. /cdz p.s. i never saw texconfig until i reinstalled teTeX yesterday (or whenever it was) -- and i've used freebsd since 3.1 days. i guess i just never paid attention. i'm probably a typical user, just installing stuff but not reading anything except the last line. >From: Thomas Gellekum >To: "Camille Zavala" >CC: ports@FreeBSD.org >Subject: teTeX port (Re: bug in noweb 2.9a port under 4.5-stable) >Date: 05 Apr 2002 13:15:30 +0200 > >I've taken Norman off the Cc: line, this is no longer a noweb issue >per se. > >"Camille Zavala" writes: > > > >Well, your noweb-2.9a-bug.nw works fine for me (teTeX, noweb-2.10a > > >(I've upgraded the port, BTW), icon-9.4.0). > > > > good news! well, sorta. i deinstalled and then reinstalled but get a > > latex error because it can't find noweb.sty. here's what i did: >[...] > > sure enough, there's no noweb.sty file anywhere in the > > /usr/local/share/texmf tree. noweb's pkg-plist file says it's in > > {/usr/local/]share/noweb/tex/noweb.sty, but tetex wants it to be in > > /usr/local/share/texmf somewhere by default. > > > > so there's still a bug in the noweb installation: the noweb.sty and > > nwmac.tex files don't get hooked into the local texmf directory tree. > >The noweb port doesn't depend on teTeX by default, and I didn't want >to install noweb's macro files into the nonexistent texmf/ tree. I've >always relied on the users to do it themselves. However, diskspace is >cheap nowadays, so I could add the dependency. > >I'd like another change in the teTeX port first, though: I want to >enable support for a `local' texmf tree (TEXMFLOCAL variable in >texmf.cnf), so additions like noweb.sty could be put somewhere below >${PREFIX}/share/texmf.local and won't clutter the distributed texmf/. > >This will also allow us to install newer versions of other (La)TeX, >BibTeX, etc. packages without clobbering the original teTeX >tree. Putting the newer stuff directly into texmf/ will do all kinds >of bad things to FreeBSD's package handling tools. > >Opinions? > >tg _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message