Re: ConTeXt on Debian: The wiki entry

[Taco Hoekwater <taco@elvenkind.com>]

Frank Küster wrote:
> 
>>After a succesful update, you have to run
>>	
>>  # texexec --make --all [--xetex | --aleph | --pdftex] <formats>
>>
..
> So I guess this is the call that would also be needed if the update
> itself goes via a package management, i.e. if one installs a new version
> of the Debian ConTeXt package.

Yes.

>>This works fine if you are root, and had a previous context update
>>done already. If you have not already and/or are not root, then you
>>have two big problems:
>>
>>* TEXFORMATS as shipped with teTeX/TL is uncomplete: there is that
>>   missing format-specific subdirectory. 
> 
> 
> So I guess TeXlive (and the existing teTeX packages within
> Linux/BSD/... distributions) should do that, so that modern ConTeXt just
> works. 

Yes. But Hans and I gave up trying to convince the teTeX maintainers
a while back, and we are not any more willing to spend even more time
on doing that (even though the situation may have improved).

> 
> 
> It might be possible by setting, in texmf.cnf,
> 
> TEXFORMATS.xetex = .;$TEXMF/web2c{xetex,}
> TEXFORMATS.pdftex = .;$TEXMF/web2c{pdftex,}
> 
> and so on.  I'm not sure, however; this of course depends on which
> progname ConTeXt uses (so it might need to be TEXFORMATS.cont-xetex or
> whatever). 

It is not the user-supplied progname, but the executable engine name.

The progname is always set to 'context' for ConTeXt, otherwise
variables like TEXINPUTS and the memory sizes would need many
more entries

    main_memory.cont-en-xetex
    main_memory.cont-de-xetex
    etc.

That is why there is a separate $engine.

>>   Not using texexec is not a big deal in itself, as long as you
>>   restrict yourself to using pdfetex and know how to edit the
>>   fmtutil config file, I guess. That's why you sometimes see that
>>   approach promoted on the wiki.
> 
> I think, with the TEXFORMATS.$engine setup working, it should be
> possible to use both, fmtutil and texexec, and get the same formats -

Agreed.

> texexec might still be better in doing other update tasks.

Also agreed.

>>* TEXFONTMAPS is also wrong: it makes pdftex (and dvipdfmx as well,
>>   I guess) find the mapfiles for dvips before their own mapfiles
>>   (those are shipped with ConTeXt).
> 
> This also sounds like a bug in TeXlive/teTeX.

Yes, I think so: it needs a few more TEXFONTMAPS lines in texmf.cnf.

>>* Lastly, ctxtools --update does a kpsewhich on context.tex to find
>>   where to install the updated files. That only works if  you have
>>   write permission for that directory (i.e. you are root),  or if you
>>   have done a private install already.
> 
> 
> So this means -update will always try to overwrite an existing
> installation, and not automatically search for a writable directory
> that's earlier in the TEXMF path?  Even not as a fallback?  This sounds
> as if this tool could be improved.

That is true, ctxtools is very new tool that could definately be
improved.

Cheers, Taco