Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

> On Jan 22, 2016, at 2:50 PM, Rhialto wrote: > Would it be possible to generate packages on-the-fly in such a way that > the normal build process will generate a package when needed? This might > be useful for Perl (CPAN) packages too, and Ruby has its own packaging > system

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 13:40:26 Brook Milligan wrote: > Is there are more or less automated way to make TeX packages? I know from > having made some that there is a lot of boilerplate. That suggests that > some tool to make these packages might make it easier to get and maintain a > complete set.

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Sat 23 Jan 2016 at 09:51:28 +1300, Mark Davies wrote: > I do have a script that takes a texlive package and creates a (first > cut at a) pkgsrc package for it. I really should clean it up and > commit it to pkgtools. Would it be possible to generate packages on-the-fly in such a way that the

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Jan 22, 2016, at 12:55 PM, Mark Davies wrote: > If there are particular texlive packages that are currently missing that > someone wants, let me know and I'll add them. Is there are more or less automated way to make TeX packages? I know from having made some that there

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 12:40:09 Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > I don't know answer if full TeX Live distrubution is available in > pkgsrc, [...] > Maybe someone can help you get the needed parts installed without > having the full texlive. The current state is that any TeX packages we have are up-to-date

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

I may have missed something in the previous thread or in this thread... but what feature are you missing? I don't know answer if full TeX Live distrubution is available in pkgsrc, but I use the pkgsrc for my LaTeX related work every week for over a decade. I have generated many documents

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:17:07AM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote: > $ ls -ld /usr/pkgsrc/*/*texlive* pkgsrc is my preferred way (for anything but latex) and I have already checked the above. I have discussed this in the lists before that pkgsrc does not provide full texlive functionality. For example

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Jan 22, 2016, at 1:51 PM, Mark Davies wrote: > I do have a script that takes a texlive package and creates a (first cut at > a) > pkgsrc package for it. I really should clean it up and commit it to pkgtools. Please do that. I know I regularly come across TeX packages

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:40:09PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > I don't know answer if full TeX Live distrubution is available in > pkgsrc, but I use the pkgsrc for my LaTeX related work every week for > over a decade. I have generated many documents (including books for > print) and it has

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

What is preventing you from using the tex packages in pkgsrc? AFAIK, they are based on texlive. On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:05 AM Mayuresh wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 08:43:33PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote: > > > amd64 xetex (from texlive) is now looking for freetype.7 and

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

Mayuresh writes: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 08:43:33PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote: >> > amd64 xetex (from texlive) is now looking for freetype.7 and not finding >> > it. >> >> Then xetex has been compiled against the wrong libs. > > Possibly when the distribution was made,

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 08:43:33PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote: > > amd64 xetex (from texlive) is now looking for freetype.7 and not finding > > it. > > Then xetex has been compiled against the wrong libs. Possibly when the distribution was made, NetBSD 6.x was the latest version, which might

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 08:51:28AM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Mayuresh writes: > > > I installed latex from TexLive DVD (2015) on NetBSD 7.0 amd64. > > > > xelatex from above package seems to have dependency on fontconfig.so.2, > > which doesn't seem to be available on

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 02:54:23PM +0100, Thomas Klausner wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 07:03:37PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote: > > xelatex from above package seems to have dependency on fontconfig.so.2, > > which doesn't seem to be available on NetBSD. > > It looks like you forgot extracting the X

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 09:12:40PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote: > > It looks like you forgot extracting the X sets when installing NetBSD. > > > However somehow libfreetype.so.7 lying on my system is still i386. Will > reinstall and report. [ Dropping pkgsrc from recipient list ] I did a fresh

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:28:19PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote: > I seem to still have freetype.7 32 bit lurking around. Not sure why there > isn't a 64 bit version installed by fresh x11 set installation. Because libfreetype is at version 17 in -7. > amd64 xetex (from texlive) is now looking for

texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 08:02:20AM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote: > Thomas Klausner writes: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:46:36AM +0530, Mayuresh wrote: > >> Isn't there supposed to be a correlation between package version and the > >> library version - i.e. shouldn't package version

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

Mayuresh writes: > I installed latex from TexLive DVD (2015) on NetBSD 7.0 amd64. > > xelatex from above package seems to have dependency on fontconfig.so.2, > which doesn't seem to be available on NetBSD. For the texlive dvd to make sense as a binary distribution, it has to

Re: texlive xelatex not working [ Was fontconfig : .so.2 not provided by 2.11.1?]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 07:03:37PM +0530, Mayuresh wrote: > xelatex from above package seems to have dependency on fontconfig.so.2, > which doesn't seem to be available on NetBSD. It looks like you forgot extracting the X sets when installing NetBSD. The xbase set contains the library you're