From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: bug#27217: texlive is too big Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 17:11:52 +0100 Message-ID: <87k1jc4hmf.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87tw3w7v1m.fsf@elephly.net> <87po1g2g43.fsf@gmail.com> <87fu2chu02.fsf@elephly.net> <87lgc42b7i.fsf@gmail.com> <87va2wdfq8.fsf@gnu.org> <87pnt44zc7.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87wonc4rvg.fsf@elephly.net> <87o98o4qwn.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87muo84jcu.fsf@elephly.net> <87ftu04i37.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38573) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ghcx5-0006yG-BG for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:13:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ghcx4-0007y7-9d for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:13:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:54835) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ghcx4-0007y2-2K for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:13:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ghcx3-0007C5-SL for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:13:01 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-reply-to: <87ftu04i37.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> 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" To: Pierre Neidhardt Cc: 27217@debbugs.gnu.org Pierre Neidhardt writes: > TeXlive packages are provided "ready to use", they are not meant to be bu= ilt. > The .ins/.dtx are only here for potential package contributors or as a so= urce of > documentation, but when it comes to TeXlive, they are not used to build t= he > resulting package. The .sty is (I think) always parachuted into the SVN > repository as well. I don=E2=80=99t think that=E2=80=99s correct. The .ins/.dtx files contain = instructions for generating files, including the .sty files, which are extracted from the .dtx files. > (Actually, sometimes there is no .ins/.dtx, just a .sty.) Correct. For some =E2=80=9Cpackages=E2=80=9D there=E2=80=99s really just a= .sty source file. But often enough .sty files are generated. We have both kinds of packages in tex.scm. Some where the .sty or .tex sou= rce files are copied to the target location and some where the .sty or .tex fil= es are generated from the .ins/.dtx sources. Whether a .sty or .tex file is a source file isn=E2=80=99t always obvious, = but sometimes they mention that they are generated from other files. > More worrisome: some fonts don't provide their source. For some fonts the provided format *is* the source. > In fact, some of them > have confusing licenses, and since the source is missing, I wouldn't call= that > "free software". But TeXlive is. That's not very consistent and a lot o= f FOSS > TeXlive packages effectively depend on closed-source fonts. I haven=E2=80=99t found any such cases yet. Could you show us cases where = the font license makes the font non-free? >> I don=E2=80=99t see this file in the texlive SVN repository. Where is it >> hosted? > > It's in Master/tlpkg/texlive.tlpdb. > Or from CTAN: > http://mirror.ctan.org/tex-archive/systems/texlive/tlnet/tlpkg/texlive.tl= pdb.xz. Ah, thanks. --=20 Ricardo