Various TeX Live problems

OpenSubmitted by Ricardo Wurmus.
Details
One participant
  • Ricardo Wurmus
Owner
unassigned
Severity
normal
R
R
Ricardo Wurmus wrote on 5 Sep 2019 23:17
(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)
87zhjie93b.fsf@elephly.net
Hi Guix,
on the “wip-texlive” branch I just fixed a serious problem with howtexlive-union generates font maps. On the “master” branch it justdoesn’t. On “wip-texlive” we run “updmap-sys” to first remove allinvalid font maps from the default configuration file (which contains*all* maps, even when they are not installed), and then a second time togenerate maps for all fonts that are actually available (e.g. as inputsof the texlive union).
This fixes one of the biggest and most confusing problems with TeX Livein Guix where the various *tex executables would complain about notbeing able to find or use certain fonts. This should be fine now.
To demonstrate it I packaged Guile CV, which depends on a few LaTeXpackages and probes for them at configure time. This will not work on“master”, but it does work on “wip-texlive”.
Despite this step forward, we’re still right in the middle ofoverhauling how we deal with TeX Live packages, because I keep runningout of steam :) Help in this area would be greatly appreciated.
Off the top of my head these are things that really ought to be changedor fixed:
- the profile hook in (guix profiles) should use “texlive-union” from (gnu packages tex), because it’s rather complicated now, and we don’t want to repeat ourselves. Currently, installing texlive-* packages into your profile won’t lead to a fully functional LaTeX installation, primarily because of screwed up font maps.
- many texlive-* packages still need to be compared to their expected outputs according to $(guix build texlive-bin)/share/tlpkg/texlive.tlpdb, especially those with names matching “texlive-{latex,generic}-*”. Packages that have names of the newer “texlive-${name}” format (and those using “simple-texlive-package”) should be complete.
- the “simple-texlive-package” procedure in (gnu packages tex) could be more helpful for cases where custom build phases are required. Right now many packages inherit from a template produced by “simple-texlive-package” and then verbosely add to the build phases with substitute-keyword-arguments.
- “simple-texlive-package” only installs “doc” files from the sources to a separate “doc” output when the package is marked as “trivial”. When texlive-build-system is used it doesn’t do this.
- “simple-texlive-package” requires an awkward custom chdir phase when texlive-build-system is supposed to be used.
- “simple-texlive-package” installs the “source” directory to the “out” output. Maybe that’s not what we want.
- “texlive-build-system” causes files to be unpacked to just a single location, which can be wrong. That’s why some packages have a “move-files” phase. The reason is that the build system installs files to an output directory (called “build”) and then copies its contents to the location specified with the “tex-directory” keyword argument.
--Ricardo
?
Your comment

Commenting via the web interface is currently disabled.

To comment on this conversation send email to 37314@debbugs.gnu.org