From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: Texlive Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 18:04:13 +0100 Message-ID: <201302051804.13252.andreas@enge.fr> References: <201302031756.11314.andreas@enge.fr> <87ip691c95.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary-01=_NuTERGFK5SHBGpR" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54295) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2lwZ-0001ZT-W2 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 12:04:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2lwT-000444-52 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 12:04:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87ip691c95.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ludovic =?utf-8?q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: bug-guix@gnu.org --Boundary-01=_NuTERGFK5SHBGpR Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am Sonntag, 3. Februar 2013 schrieb Ludovic Court=C3=A8s: > OK. So the catalogs are built once for all during the build, right? Yes, over the full content of the texlive distribution. > Perhaps =E2=80=9Cdata=E2=80=9D would be a (slightly) more descriptive nam= e? Okay, why not; I used "share" because normally the subdirectories end up in= =20 "share". > Looks like your approach works fine, but maybe we could still ask Karl > Berry to see what he thinks? This would be an opportunity to ask him a few questions, so why not. > > But everything is FSF and Debian free. How about adding a license > > "mixed" or "fsf-free"? Or do you have a good suggestion? > Yes, or we could just export the =E2=80=98license=E2=80=99 constructor fr= om (guix > licenses). That would allow us to make a custom objects when > needed, like here. Or we could leave it empty in some way; just call it "free"? It is clear=20 that we will only package free software; so a license field that can only=20 state "a collection of free licenses, for details, see the source" conveys= =20 really no information at all. So I do not see what to construct here. My=20 suggestion: (define fsf (license "fsf" "http://www.gnu.org/licenses/" "A collection of free licenses according to the FSF, see the=20 source for details.")) > And the good thing is that now that you=E2=80=99ve done TeX Live and netp= bm, > you=E2=80=99ll find that Xorg is really piece of cake. :-) After looking at it, my impression is that at least the build process=20 should be much easier (once the right order of installation determined). > > (define-public texlive > >=20 > > (package > > =20 > > (name "texlive") > > (version "2012") > Should be 20120701 no? There is one edition per year, commonly refered to as "TeX Live 20YY"; so=20 there is no reason to go into more datails. > (with-directory-excursion bin > (for-each symlink > '("pdftex" "pdftex" "xetex" "luatex" "luatex.1") > '("latex" "pdflatex" "xelatex" "lualatex" "lualatex.1"))) Very elegant, thanks for the suggestion! But actually, this manual symlink= =20 phase has become superfluous by some directoty related configure flags I=20 just added. > > (mkdir "texlive-extra") > > (chdir "texlive-extra") > > (apply unpack (list #:source texlive-extra)) > > (apply patch-source-shebangs (list #:source > > texlive-extra)) (system* "mv" "tlpkg" share) > > (chdir "../..") >=20 > When you have paired =E2=80=98cd foo=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98cd ..=E2=80=99= , you can instead use > =E2=80=98with-directory-excursion=E2=80=99, as shown above. Okay. Here it is less useful, since "unpack" changes directories, so a=20 "chdir ".."" will remain in any case. Andreas --Boundary-01=_NuTERGFK5SHBGpR Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Am Sonntag,= 3. Februar 2013 schrieb Ludovic Court=C3=A8s:

> OK. S= o the catalogs are built once for all during the build, right?

&nb= sp;

Yes, over t= he full content of the texlive distribution.

&nb= sp;

> Perhap= s =E2=80=9Cdata=E2=80=9D would be a (slightly) more descriptive name?

&nb= sp;

Okay, why n= ot; I used "share" because normally the subdirectories end up in = "share".

&nb= sp;

> Looks = like your approach works fine, but maybe we could still ask Karl

> Berry = to see what he thinks?

&nb= sp;

This would = be an opportunity to ask him a few questions, so why not.

&nb= sp;

> > B= ut everything is FSF and Debian free. How about adding a license

> > &= quot;mixed" or "fsf-free"? Or do you have a good suggestion?=

> Yes, o= r we could just export the =E2=80=98license=E2=80=99 constructor from (guix=

> licens= es). That would allow us to make a custom <license> objects when

> needed= , like here.

&nb= sp;

Or we could= leave it empty in some way; just call it "free"? It is clear tha= t we will only package free software; so a license field that can only stat= e "a collection of free licenses, for details, see the source" co= nveys really no information at all. So I do not see what to construct here.= My suggestion:

&nb= sp;

(define fsf=

(license = "fsf"

= "http://www.gnu.org/licenses/"

= "A collection of free licenses according to the FSF, see the source fo= r details."))

&nb= sp;

> And th= e good thing is that now that you=E2=80=99ve done TeX Live and netpbm,

> you=E2= =80=99ll find that Xorg is really piece of cake. :-)

&nb= sp;

After looki= ng at it, my impression is that at least the build process should be much e= asier (once the right order of installation determined).

&nb= sp;

> > (= define-public texlive

> > <= /p>

> > = (package

> > =

> > = (name "texlive")

> > = (version "2012")

> Should= be 20120701 no?

&nb= sp;

There is on= e edition per year, commonly refered to as "TeX Live 20YY"; so th= ere is no reason to go into more datails.

&nb= sp;

> (wit= h-directory-excursion bin

> (f= or-each symlink

> = '("pdftex" "pdftex" "xetex" "lua= tex" "luatex.1")

> = '("latex" "pdflatex" "xelatex" "= lualatex" "lualatex.1")))

&nb= sp;

Very elegan= t, thanks for the suggestion! But actually, this manual symlink phase has b= ecome superfluous by some directoty related configure flags I just added.

&nb= sp;

> > = (mkdir "texlive-extra")

> > = (chdir "texlive-extra")

> > = (apply unpack (list #:source texlive-extra))

> > = (apply patch-source-shebangs (list #:source

> > = texlive-extra)) (system* "mv" "tlpkg" share= )

> > = (chdir "../..")

>

> When y= ou have paired =E2=80=98cd foo=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98cd ..=E2=80=99, you ca= n instead use

> =E2=80= =98with-directory-excursion=E2=80=99, as shown above.

&nb= sp;

Okay. Here = it is less useful, since "unpack" changes directories, so a "= ;chdir ".."" will remain in any case.

&nb= sp;

Andreas

&nb= sp;

--Boundary-01=_NuTERGFK5SHBGpR--