Steffen R. Knollmann wrote these words on 08/21/05 16:06 CST: > I've just read the TeX page again after some time and found some > things that might be done in a neater way. > > First of all one can omit the 'TEXMFVAR=path prog' constructs if > 'prog-sys' (texconfig-sys, updmap-sys, etc.) instead of 'prog' is used. > Also the configure switches '-exec-prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/bin' can be > substituted by '--disable-multiplatform'.
I installed TeX today and didn't go back and look at this message. I wish I would have. It would have saved me some time. I'm scrolling through the BLFS-Dev messages looking for something DJ sent about a bug in X and GCC-4 and I ran across this message. Today I implemented the 'prog-sys' stuff, and had to figure it out on my own, even after you posted this message. You are the man, Steffen, when it comes to TeX and I neglected to make a note of this message when you posted it. > Currently, TeX is somewhat squeezed into $prefix/share/texmf and > additions are also put there. Now what I want to express is a > somewhat philosophical thing: > > - The tetex-texmf-3.0.tar.gz tarball (and tetex-texmfsrc-3.0.tar.gz > too) should be unpack to '$prefix/share/texmf-dist' > - Any additions (like fonts) should be made to > '$prefix/share/texmf-local' > - Configuration things can stay in $prefix/share/texmf You're right in the -dist is the recommended place. However, my experience today showed that configuration stuff goes to $prefix/share/texmf-config > Another thing that should be addressed is the impact of > 'texconfig-sys font rw' as this will set write permission for certain > directories within the texmf-trees. There are ways to work around this > (like creating the needed fonts once and setting up a varfont directory > for anything that was left out).[1] This I completely let go of. I'm not a big fan of the /var/tmp/texfonts directory that is created (with world R/W rights, though the sticky bit is set) as the place for globally writable fonts. This should be addressed and a permanent solution implemented. > So, what's the general opinion? Is it worthwhile to do this for the > BLFS book? Is it necessary to provide a more detailed installation > instruction on how the TeX-system is organized (it is not TeX From > Scratch after all ;-)), hence to motivate why things are done in the way > they are done? Would BLFS be happy with saying 'It works the way it is, > for anything beyond that, read the documentation'? Any ideas from real > TeX-gurus? If you suggest a plan, I'll be more than happy to second your opinion and eventually get it into the book. As always, Steffen, thanks for your help. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 02:38:00 up 153 days, 2:11, 3 users, load average: 0.01, 0.04, 0.22 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
