On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 09:03:15PM +0000, Ken Moffat wrote: > This ticket lists a whole lot of changes to how we build Tex from > source. I took it, because I don't (in general) like packages which > use their own static versions of system libs. But I now see that > the following are external references: GD, t1lib, ZZIPlib, TECkit, > Graphite, and also CLISP (not needed for the main part of Tex, if > I'm now reading the ticket correctly). > > Maybe Pierre spotted this, which is why he said he hadn't got time > before the package freeze - I was thinking "just change the > instructions for the existing package version". My mistake. > > And more generally, do we want these extra packages if they are > only used by TeX ? I have no idea about the vulnerabilities history > of any of them, nor how the TeX developers handle upstream changes > to these libs. >
Looking a little further after posting (I'm good at that), I see that firefox can use graphite, BUT it is turned off by default, and although 26.0 seems to include a local copy [ I'm still downloading 27 ] there is no option to use a system version. However, libreoffice DOES allow for system graphite so I guess that might be worth having. t1lib, CLISP, TECkit do not seem to have had any recent releases. Looking at fedora cgit, they patch t1lib for various vulnerabilities. For clisp they are using a mercurial snapshot, so perhaps it is one of those projects that no longer makes releases. TECkit looks to be fairly straightforward, bar a missing header for recent C++ and apparently a need to run autogen.sh to create configure. I'm coming round to the idea of adding these tools, but for at least graphite I want to confirm that libreoffice will use it, in a fresh build. > Opinions, please. > ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
