replace TeTex package by TeX Live

Firmicus · 2007-07-19 15:14:53

attila wrote:

Firmicus wrote:I have now added the line "export MALLOC_CHECK_=0" to the PKGBUILD of texlive-core of course.
There is another thing strange with this but this could be only guilty for me kde user: I have to put this in /etc/profile, ~/.bashrc and to replace "kile" in the kde menue with "export MALLOC_CHECK_=0 && kile" to get it work in kile. Not realy nice such a sideeffect and fantastic that PDExperiment626 found it out.

Oh, I thought this parameter was only important at compile time, but now I realize it is also necessary at runtime! So then I should add a warning message to that effect in the install script. (Which means I have to compile texlive-core for the zillionth time, arrrgh! Or perhaps I can just hack it in the package? But then I risk to mess up with permissions and stuff...

attila wrote:

Firmicus wrote:The groups could be for ex.: texlive-most, texlive-lang, texlive-doc. And we could have a dummy package texlive-complete which depends on all three groups.
I find this idea very good and absolut understandable which is still better than "very good".-)

Ok, I'll try this and see how it works.

F

attila · 2007-07-19 15:45:54

Firmicus wrote:
Oh, I thought this parameter was only important at compile time, but now I realize it is also necessary at runtime! So then I should add a warning message to that effect in the install script. (Which means I have to compile texlive-core for the zillionth time, arrrgh! Or perhaps I can just hack it in the package? But then I risk to mess up with permissions and stuff...

I suggest to put the information here or on another place in the web because how i understand the information in the link from PDExperiment626 this is a fundamental problem for some applications in combination with glibc. But this be only my 2 cent to avoid reaching the next century by compiling and compiling and ... -)

PDExperiment626 · 2007-07-19 16:23:58

attila wrote:

But you have rebooted or logged out in this time? -)

Ah yes, it appears my eagerness got the best of me *doh*. I just needed to restart as attila suggested and the path was corrected.

As for using svn as opposed to rysnc. I rewrote the texlive-core package to do this, and it's not worth it. The install technically worked but took something like 2 hours as opposed to a few minutes with rsync. The reason why is simply due to the fact that SVN isn't meant to handle checkouts over sparse directories in a project. Indeed there are no exclude options for svn checkout; it's not even possible to checkout single files, only directories. To use svn basically requires putting a loop into the package build and executing an svn checkout for EACH subdirectory. As you may expect, this is dreadfully slow and produces a preponderance of .svn files corresponding to each one of these subdirectories.

SVN would be the way to go if one wanted the entire TeXLive distribution (ie checking out at most a handful of subdirectories). It is ashame this is the case as the current package builds do not allow for any versioning control.

One other thing, if you are compiling the sources make sure that you haven't extracted the .zip into a directory with special characters or spaces. I had compile errors when I extracted into a directory that had parentheses in the name. This can be fixed by adding double quotes around anything with $startdir in the PKGBUILD; but I don't know if this is a standard thing to do in PKGBUILDS.

I also think firmicus' idea of using three main PKGBUILD groups is a good one. I also understand the argument to use online documentation over local versions; but I think it's still a good idea to include a doc PKGBUILD group just for completeness. Afterall, you've already done all the hard work .

Last edited by PDExperiment626 (2007-07-20 22:15:31)

Blind · 2007-07-21 15:34:17

Ok guys,

I might have some time this weekend and I would like to test the packages. Can anyone tell me the exact steps on how to proceed? In particular, do I need to uninstall teTeX before installing?

Cheers,
Blind

Firmicus · 2007-07-23 09:07:18

Blind wrote:

I might have some time this weekend and I would like to test the packages. Can anyone tell me the exact steps on how to proceed? In particular, do I need to uninstall teTeX before installing?

Hi Blind,

Sorry, I was away the whole weekend. Here is how it goes:

* If you want to build the packages yourself:

1. Download the latest version of my build tree from here.

2. Extract it to $your_texlive_builddir.

3. cd $your_texlive_builddir

4. for d in texlive-*; do cd $d && makepkg -dc 2>&1 | tee > ../build-$d.log && cd .. ; done

5. Check in the logfiles whether the build processes went ok.

6. Optionally you can gensync your_texlive_builddir with a texlive.db.tar.gz on $PKGDEST and do pacman -Sy

* But if you only want to test the built packages: email me <firmicus ÷at÷ gmx ÷dot÷ net> and I'll give you access to my ISP's media centre, where I have put all my latest texlive packages.

Finally you can install texlive-core and whichever additional package you might need. In the process tetex will automatically be removed from your system.

Hope it helps!

F

Firmicus · 2007-07-23 09:09:38

Hi everyone,

I have put some TeXLive info on the wiki. Have a look at http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/TeXLive and tell me what you think.

F

Blind · 2007-07-23 17:19:51

Danke, Firmicus. Klasse Arbeit!

Will try now.

Cheers!

Issues as I go through the process:

1. Ok, dumb me, but maybe a makedepend for 'rsync' would be appropriate?
Edit: Sorry, I saw that the PKGBUILDs have that dependency...
but you suggested makepkg -d ??
2. texlive-core:

g++ -march=i686 -O2 -pipe   -o ../../bin/makeconv makeconv.o ucnvstat.o genmbcs.o gencnvex.o -L../../lib -lsicutu -L../../lib -lsicui18n -L../../lib -lsicuuc -L../../lib -L../../stubdata -lsicudata -lpthread -lm  
config.status: creating tools/makeconv/makeconv.1
makeconv.o: In function `main':
makeconv.c:(.text+0xcb3): undefined reference to `T_CString_stricmp_3_4'
makeconv.c:(.text+0xcdd): undefined reference to `uprv_isInvariantString_3_4'
gencnvex.o: In function `generateToUTable':
gencnvex.c:(.text+0x804): undefined reference to `u_strFromUTF32_3_4'
gencnvex.c:(.text+0x877): undefined reference to `u_strFromUTF32_3_4'
../../lib/libsicutu.a(ucm.ao): In function `ucm_parseMappingLine':
ucm.c:(.text+0xd76): undefined reference to `u_strFromUTF32_3_4'
../../lib/libsicutu.a(ucm.ao): In function `ucm_sortTable':
ucm.c:(.text+0x11af): undefined reference to `uprv_sortArray_3_4'
ucm.c:(.text+0x11fb): undefined reference to `uprv_sortArray_3_4'
../../lib/libsicutu.a(ucmstate.ao): In function `ucm_optimizeStates':
ucmstate.c:(.text+0x704): undefined reference to `uprv_sortArray_3_4'
../../lib/libsicuuc.a(ustring.ao): In function `_appendUChars':
ustring.c:(.text+0x1d17): undefined reference to `u_charsToUChars_3_4'
../../lib/libsicuuc.a(ustring.ao): In function `_charPtr_charAt':
ustring.c:(.text+0x1ebf): undefined reference to `u_charsToUChars_3_4'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[3]: *** [../../bin/makeconv] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/var/abs/local/texlive/texlive-core/src/Work/libs/icu-xetex/tools/makeconv'
make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/abs/local/texlive/texlive-core/src/Work/libs/icu-xetex/tools'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/abs/local/texlive/texlive-core/src/Work/libs/icu-xetex'
make: *** [libs/icu-xetex/lib/libsicuuc.a] Error 2
==> ERROR: Build Failed.  Aborting...

What I wondered about is the t1lib dependency. It tried to build the texlive-core package without even complaining about the missing dependency (I didn't have that installed). Oh, doooh, that was makepkg -d....
Is there a particular reason to do it with the -d flag, Firmicus?
3. Finished. The rest built fine. Any other ideas about No. 2?

Oh, I like the Wiki page, it looks nice and structured. The rest should be self explanatory. I hope we get this into community soon - maybe even extra?

Last edited by Blind (2007-07-24 15:29:07)

attila · 2007-07-25 12:51:20

Is there a particular reason to do it with the -d flag, Firmicus?

It saves the time to install texlive-core and one other package at first before building the rest.

3. Finished. The rest built fine. Any other ideas about No. 2?

I have similar the same problem and for me it helps to change the MAKEFLAGS from "-j4" to "-j1". Perhaps it helps for you too.

Allan · 2007-07-25 22:28:20

I just build texlive-core and texlive-bibtexextra without any problems. Well done Firmicus!

Offtopic: Anyone know a good latex editor for gnome (excluding emacs/vi...) Amyedit is just doesn't have the features I'm used to (TeXnicCenter).

Last edited by Allan (2007-07-25 22:34:20)

[vEX] · 2007-07-26 05:58:40

I just use a plain text editor, but if you want you could try Texmaker, you can find it in AUR.

attila · 2007-07-26 07:19:26

Offtopic: Anyone know a good latex editor for gnome (excluding emacs/vi...) Amyedit is just doesn't have the features I'm used to (TeXnicCenter).

No Sir, this is definitely not Off-Topic.:) You can take a look at kile (http://kile.sourceforge.net/index.php) which looks similar from the screenshots as TeXnicCenter and is in the extra repository.

Firmicus · 2007-07-26 07:24:51

Allan wrote:

Offtopic: Anyone know a good latex editor for gnome (excluding emacs/vi...) Amyedit is just doesn't have the features I'm used to (TeXnicCenter).

I personally use gvim with latex-suite, but this may not be your thing. You may also give winefish a try (http://winefish.berlios.de). I think there is a package in AUR. But I fear that development has stalled. Overall kile may be your best choice, even under gnome...

tkjacobsen · 2007-07-26 07:27:48

Allan wrote:

Anyone know a good latex editor for gnome (excluding emacs/vi...) Amyedit is just doesn't have the features I'm used to (TeXnicCenter).

Try the gedit latex plugin, found here: http://live.gnome.org/Gedit/LaTeXPlugin

Allan · 2007-07-26 13:08:03

Thanks for the suggestions. Today I have tried AmyEdit (too basic), Winefish (instant dislike...), TexMaker (once I get past the need for Qt, but still was a bit clunky) and GEdit with Latex plugin (best so far). I have also considered the latex plugin for eclipse (since I mainly use latex to document my code) but I am annoyed they still haven't implemented a latex view and the buttons clutter my toolbars while coding.... maybe I'm too picky!

Going to bite the bullet and install Kile - by all accounts it is the best latex editor for linux. I would have preferred not to pull in all the Qt/KDE libraries but with a new laptop I probably will not notice the the extra overhead

big_gie · 2007-07-26 13:29:18

I mainly use Kile, but I also tried Texmaker and it seemed to be really similar to Kile, without KDE (only qt). If you really don't want KDE, I would suggest Texmaker as it is as close as possible to Kile without KDE.

Good luck!

Ashren · 2007-07-26 13:33:06

If you want to try texmaker without reeling in qt4, try the installer here: http://www.xm1math.net/texmaker/download.html. Works fine here and seems pretty fast, had to chmod +x on the file first, though.

dante · 2007-07-26 16:18:58

@Firmicus: What are the advantages of vim or gvim? My first impression is really strange. There's nothing similar like in Kile or Gedit. For me a LaTEx editor should have:

- code completion (for text and LaTeX)
- shortcuts, which I can define for my own
- macros (like WinEdt)

Some of these things are in kile. But I'm a Gnome users, so it's not the best thing.

dante

dimi · 2007-07-26 16:28:45

Great work!

Last edited by dimi (2007-07-29 21:49:28)

attila · 2007-07-26 17:11:36

dimi wrote:
I needed libunicode to compile texlive-core, maybe you should add this dependency into the PKGBUILD.

Strange because i have not this package installed. How do you recognize that texlive-core need it?

PDExperiment626 · 2007-07-26 17:17:14

I'm going to throw my two cents in here in regards to what are good latex editors. I'm a math grad student and have been using latex for about eight years to write various mathematical documents. I usually end up writing documents anywhere from twenty to several hundred pages in length. So, my methods probably aren't for everyone. First, I breakup my documents quite a bit (each section usually is it's own .tex file) and mimic the structure of the chapters, sections, etc. with a directory layout. I also use makefiles to manage cleaning up of files, compiling, and sometimes uploading to various websites. Lastly, I use svn to manage the entire directory tree.

Given that I do much of my document management via svn and makefiles, I don't require as much from my Latex editor. Basically, I want highlighting, some level of command-completion, a side pane where I can view my files and a bottom pane so I can see any compile errors or warnings. As for macros and whatnot, I have never found much use for them. The mathematics I type out have little repetition. I also do not like clicking buttons to input latex commands for two reasons. First, buttons take up a lot of screen real estate on an IDE (I work on a laptop mostly). Second relying upon buttons to enter in latex commands becomes problematic if you are forced to use another machine with a different IDE. If you know the latex commands for the mathematics you write well enough, you can actually type the mathematics in faster than button clicking (by a significant margin for complex mathematics).

Anyway, I use winefish as my current latex IDE because I can get a clean interface that is absent of latex-command buttons. I can customize winefish so that it interfaces with my makefiles (ie F5-> make, F4-> make clean, etc). The compiling pane allows me to click on an error and it take me right to the associated line of code (probably a common feature). I can see my file/document hierarchy easily. Basically, it's a clutter-free interface that give me what I want. I usually use evince to view the pdf output of a compile as I don't have to reload it like I do with acrobat reader. So, I usually have evince and winefish in a windowing group (I use beryl) and flip the windows to view evince after a compile. This is my favorite way to write up a math document.

Sorry for the long post, but this is something I've spent quite a lot of time tinkering with. In the end I'd say the choice of IDE is a personal one. However, learning to use makefiles and svn makes managing large/complex documents so much easier; and I highly recommend learning these to those starting out in latex.

dimi · 2007-07-26 19:02:07

@attila: i got some "undefined references" warnings when i tried to compile texcore-live. after installing libunicode it worked (at least that's what i thought).

But if you don't have that file, i probably am mistaken...
I will examine this, sorry if i posted wrong information.

Firmicus · 2007-07-26 20:09:57

dante wrote:

@Firmicus: What are the advantages of vim or gvim? My first impression is really strange. There's nothing similar like in Kile or Gedit. For me a LaTEx editor should have:
- code completion (for text and LaTeX)
- shortcuts, which I can define for my own
- macros (like WinEdt)

I only wanted to mention what I use, without apolegetical motives. The advantage for me is that since I use gvim for all other editing tasks anyway, I prefer to stick with a tool I master quite well rather than constantly switching between different editors. With latex-suite for vim (http://vim-latex.sourceforge.net) one has a quite powerful -- but certainly not perfect -- environment for writing latex documents. It certainly has all of the features you wish and more, but these are less immediately visible and intuitive than with Kile or TeXMaker for example. You should use what you feel more comfortable with. For instance AucTeX for Emacs is said to be excellent, but despite repeated efforts, I always felt a unmistakable repulsion toward the "emacs" world. With vim substantial efforts were also needed at the beginning, but very soon I had a great feeling of being enpowered with something special (very different from what I had experienced when I learned the basics of vi on my university's Unix account in the early 90s!). That is purely subjective!

F

attila · 2007-07-26 20:12:01

dimi wrote:But if you don't have that file, i probably am mistaken... I will examine this, sorry if i posted wrong information.

Ups, don't be sorry for posting information because from my view every information is better than none information. I can't remember what was the problem but at the first compile it breaks too. In my case it was that i use even MAKEFLAGS="-j4" and after deactivating this all was fine. So if libunicode can solves this for me it would be fine but not realistic.:)

PDExperiment626 wrote:
Sorry for the long post, but this is something I've spent quite a lot of time tinkering with. In the end I'd say the choice of IDE is a personal one. However, learning to use makefiles and svn makes managing large/complex documents so much easier; and I highly recommend learning these to those starting out in latex.

Interesting view of handling latex and i can understand you, at most that it is "a personal one".:) For me it is not so bad to switch between the editors because my "the only one" was XEdit and stays on my Atari which i never used for a long time ... i think i will miss it for ever.:)

ezzetabi · 2007-07-27 15:59:51

My compilation crashes when compiling xetex, I tried installing libunicode (who knows?) but it didn't help... I write mainly in english, so it not a big problem. Yet I'd like to solve it... anyone had problems with xetex?

Almost out of topic, if the texcore build fails what should I delete for trying again, after fixing the PKGBUILD, without redownloading all sources?

Last edited by ezzetabi (2007-07-27 16:01:52)

Firmicus · 2007-07-27 19:21:50

ezzetabi wrote:

My compilation crashes when compiling xetex, I tried installing libunicode (who knows?) but it didn't help... I write mainly in english, so it not a big problem. Yet I'd like to solve it... anyone had problems with xetex?

Don't bother with compiling, It is a nasty business . Send me an email at <firmicus ÷at÷ gmx ÷dot÷ net>) and I'll give you access to my media center, where I have uploaded all my built packages.

BTW, xetex can be useful even if you write only in English, as it gives you the possibility to use any OpenType font that is available on your system (through fontconfig), without the hassle of font installation!

F

EDIT: libunicode is not needed

Last edited by Firmicus (2007-07-29 09:08:02)

Arch Linux

#101 2007-07-19 15:14:53

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#102 2007-07-19 15:45:54

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#103 2007-07-19 16:23:58

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#104 2007-07-21 15:34:17

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#105 2007-07-23 09:07:18

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#106 2007-07-23 09:09:38

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#107 2007-07-23 17:19:51

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#108 2007-07-25 12:51:20

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#109 2007-07-25 22:28:20

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#110 2007-07-26 05:58:40

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#111 2007-07-26 07:19:26

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#112 2007-07-26 07:24:51

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#113 2007-07-26 07:27:48

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#114 2007-07-26 13:08:03

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#115 2007-07-26 13:29:18

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#116 2007-07-26 13:33:06

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#117 2007-07-26 16:18:58

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#118 2007-07-26 16:28:45

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#119 2007-07-26 17:11:36

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#120 2007-07-26 17:17:14

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#121 2007-07-26 19:02:07

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#122 2007-07-26 20:09:57

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#123 2007-07-26 20:12:01

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#124 2007-07-27 15:59:51

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

#125 2007-07-27 19:21:50

Re: replace TeTex package by TeX Live

Board footer