version dates confuse me after upgrade

version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Sanjoy Mahajan]

I just upgraded following the instructions on the wiki, and wanted to
check that it went well and that the newer ones were being found --
always a nightmare subject in *TeX* with paths configurable by a
combination of environment variables, config files, and config files
chosen by other env variables.  So:

$ texexec --version

 TeXExec 5.4.3 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1997-2005

               texexec : TeXExec 5.4.3 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1997-2005
               texutil : TeXUtil 9.0.1 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1992-2006
                   tex : pdfeTeX, 3.141592-1.21a-2.2 (Web2C 7.5.4)
               context : ver: 2006.03.25 13:21
               cont-en : ver: 2005.01.31  fmt: 2006.3.28  mes: english

Here is the version line in the output of 'texexec somerandomfile.tex':

  ConTeXt  ver: 2006.03.25 13:21  fmt: 2006.4.6  int: english  mes: english

The context version date match what texexec --version produces (though
texexec doesn't give the fmt date).  But what does the early cont-en
version date (2005.01.31) mean?

-Sanjoy

`A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves.'
   - Bertrand de Jouvenal

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Hans Hagen]

Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
> I just upgraded following the instructions on the wiki, and wanted to
> check that it went well and that the newer ones were being found --
> always a nightmare subject in *TeX* with paths configurable by a
> combination of environment variables, config files, and config files
> chosen by other env variables.  So:
>
> $ texexec --version
>
>  TeXExec 5.4.3 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1997-2005
>
>                texexec : TeXExec 5.4.3 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1997-2005
>                texutil : TeXUtil 9.0.1 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1992-2006
>                    tex : pdfeTeX, 3.141592-1.21a-2.2 (Web2C 7.5.4)
>                context : ver: 2006.03.25 13:21
>                cont-en : ver: 2005.01.31  fmt: 2006.3.28  mes: english
>
> Here is the version line in the output of 'texexec somerandomfile.tex':
>
>   ConTeXt  ver: 2006.03.25 13:21  fmt: 2006.4.6  int: english  mes: english
>
> The context version date match what texexec --version produces (though
> texexec doesn't give the fmt date).  But what does the early cont-en
> version date (2005.01.31) mean?
>   
context itself (the tex file) is recent, while your formats are old 

did you run texexec --make --all 

Hans 


-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Sanjoy Mahajan]

Hans Hagen wrote:
> context itself (the tex file) is recent, while your formats are old 
> did you run texexec --make --all 

I had run 'texexec --make' (following the directions at
<http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Debian_installation>).  I just ran
'texexec --make --all' but the version info looks the same:

$ texexec --version
...
               context : ver: 2006.03.25 13:21
               cont-en : ver: 2005.01.31  fmt: 2006.3.28  mes: english

With the help of 'texexec --verbose --version' I think I tracked down
the reason.  

On March 28th a friend told me that a paper we were writing was coming
out in A4 format, which would be fine for everyone outside the
Homeland.  So I ran 'texconfig' and set the default paper to letter.
That created a ~/.texmf-var directory and generated lots of formats:

$ pwd
/home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c
$ ls -lt *.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 3070069 2006-03-28 10:31 pdfjadetex.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 3100416 2006-03-28 10:31 jadetex.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  225933 2006-03-28 10:31 mptopdf.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 5308842 2006-03-28 10:31 cont-en.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  420822 2006-03-28 10:30 amstex.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  896740 2006-03-28 10:30 lamed.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  344826 2006-03-28 10:30 aleph.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 4024948 2006-03-28 10:30 lambda.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 1189914 2006-03-28 10:30 omega.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  290204 2006-03-28 10:30 pdfetex.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 1980649 2006-03-28 10:30 pdflatex.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  290170 2006-03-28 10:30 etex.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  260766 2006-03-28 10:30 pdftex.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 1980614 2006-03-28 10:30 latex.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  247167 2006-03-28 10:30 tex.fmt

When I install the latest context with, say, 'texexec --make --all',
it creates these three formats:

$ pwd
/home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c
$ ls -lt `find -mindepth 2 -name '*.fmt'`
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  229571 2006-04-06 10:26 ./pdfetex/mptopdf.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 6486671 2006-04-06 10:26 ./pdfetex/cont-nl.fmt
-rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 6407346 2006-04-06 10:26 ./pdfetex/cont-en.fmt

However, the web2c/{mptopdf,cont-en}.fmt formats created by texconfig
shadow these formats:

$ (cd ; kpsewhich --format=fmt cont-en )
/home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c/cont-en.fmt

I can easily fix it by deleting the cont-en and mptopdf formats made
by texconfig, but that is a hack -- a symptom of its hack nature being
that the next time I run texconfig, the shadowing formats will return
to web2c/.

Perhaps others have been bitten by this search-path trouble?  Is there
a clean solution?

I'm using tetex-3.0 on a Debian testing/unstable system.  The
/etc/texmf/texmf.cnf has this, which is the default:

TEXFORMATS = .;$TEXMF/web2c

with nothing special for pdfetex (e.g. no TEXFORMATS.pdfetex), so I
think texconfig was right to put formats in the web2c/. directory, and
texexec shouldn't put its formats in a web2c/pdfetex/ subdirectory.
This is the relevant piece from the 'texexec --verbose --make --all':

       assuming engine : pdfetex
located formatpath (1) : .:/home/sanjoy/.texmf-config/web2c:/home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c:/home/sanjoy/texmf/web2c:/etc/texmf/web2c:!!/var/lib/texmf/web2c:!!/usr/local/share/texmf/web2c:!!/usr/share/texmf/web2c:!!/usr/share/texmf-tetex/web2c:!!/usr/share/texmf-texlive/web2c
located formatpath (2) : .:/home/sanjoy/.texmf-config/web2c:/home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c:/home/sanjoy/texmf/web2c:/etc/texmf/web2c:!!/var/lib/texmf/web2c:!!/usr/local/share/texmf/web2c:!!/usr/share/texmf/web2c:!!/usr/share/texmf-tetex/web2c:!!/usr/share/texmf-texlive/web2c
located formatpath (3) : /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c
      using formatpath : /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c/pdfetex/

(appears three times, once for each format) It's the 'using
formatpath' line that worries me.

-Sanjoy

`Never underestimate the evil of which men of power are capable.'
         --Bertrand Russell, _War Crimes in Vietnam_, chapter 1.

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Hans Hagen]

Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
> Hans Hagen wrote:
>   
>> context itself (the tex file) is recent, while your formats are old 
>> did you run texexec --make --all 
>>     
>
> I had run 'texexec --make' (following the directions at
> <http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Debian_installation>).  I just ran
> 'texexec --make --all' but the version info looks the same:
>
> $ texexec --version
> ...
>                context : ver: 2006.03.25 13:21
>                cont-en : ver: 2005.01.31  fmt: 2006.3.28  mes: english
>
> With the help of 'texexec --verbose --version' I think I tracked down
> the reason.  
>
> On March 28th a friend told me that a paper we were writing was coming
> out in A4 format, which would be fine for everyone outside the
> Homeland.  So I ran 'texconfig' and set the default paper to letter.
> That created a ~/.texmf-var directory and generated lots of formats:
>
> $ pwd
> /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c
> $ ls -lt *.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 3070069 2006-03-28 10:31 pdfjadetex.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 3100416 2006-03-28 10:31 jadetex.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  225933 2006-03-28 10:31 mptopdf.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 5308842 2006-03-28 10:31 cont-en.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  420822 2006-03-28 10:30 amstex.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  896740 2006-03-28 10:30 lamed.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  344826 2006-03-28 10:30 aleph.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 4024948 2006-03-28 10:30 lambda.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 1189914 2006-03-28 10:30 omega.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  290204 2006-03-28 10:30 pdfetex.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 1980649 2006-03-28 10:30 pdflatex.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  290170 2006-03-28 10:30 etex.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  260766 2006-03-28 10:30 pdftex.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 1980614 2006-03-28 10:30 latex.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  247167 2006-03-28 10:30 tex.fmt
>
> When I install the latest context with, say, 'texexec --make --all',
> it creates these three formats:
>
> $ pwd
> /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c
> $ ls -lt `find -mindepth 2 -name '*.fmt'`
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy  229571 2006-04-06 10:26 ./pdfetex/mptopdf.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 6486671 2006-04-06 10:26 ./pdfetex/cont-nl.fmt
> -rw-r--r--  1 sanjoy sanjoy 6407346 2006-04-06 10:26 ./pdfetex/cont-en.fmt
>
> However, the web2c/{mptopdf,cont-en}.fmt formats created by texconfig
> shadow these formats:
>
> $ (cd ; kpsewhich --format=fmt cont-en )
> /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c/cont-en.fmt
>
> I can easily fix it by deleting the cont-en and mptopdf formats made
> by texconfig, but that is a hack -- a symptom of its hack nature being
> that the next time I run texconfig, the shadowing formats will return
> to web2c/.
>   
well, either use texconfig to generate context formats or use texexec --make ; texconfig does not support the $engine subpath feature (too difficult to implement) but we need this in order to distinguish between formats for pdftex, aleph and xetex 

Hans 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Taco Hoekwater]

Hi,

All this confusion with the formats and their paths is why my teTeX
installation page starts with:

   "De-install any existing teTeX"

That really is the least confusing option, IMO. If you really do
not want to do that (because you only ever use pdftex, for example)
simply always copy the formats generated by texexec over the ones
generated by texconfig/fmtutil.

Taco

Hans Hagen wrote:
>> 
>> I can easily fix it by deleting the cont-en and mptopdf formats
>> made by texconfig, but that is a hack -- a symptom of its hack
>> nature being that the next time I run texconfig, the shadowing
>> formats will return to web2c/.
>> 
> 
> well, either use texconfig to generate context formats or use texexec
> --make ; texconfig does not support the $engine subpath feature (too
> difficult to implement) but we need this in order to distinguish
> between formats for pdftex, aleph and xetex
> 

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Gerben Wierda]

On 6 Apr 2006, at 18:06, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> All this confusion with the formats and their paths is why my teTeX
> installation page starts with:
>
>    "De-install any existing teTeX"
>
> That really is the least confusing option, IMO. If you really do
> not want to do that (because you only ever use pdftex, for example)
> simply always copy the formats generated by texexec over the ones
> generated by texconfig/fmtutil.

Currently, my fmtutil produced formats work fine:

                texexec : TeXExec 5.4.3 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1997-2005
                texutil : TeXUtil 9.0.1 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1992-2006
                    tex : pdfeTeX, 3.141592-1.30.4-2.2 (Web2C 7.5.5)
                context : ver: 2006.04.05 20:06
                cont-en : ver: 2006.04.05 20:06  fmt: 2006.4.6  mes:  
english
                cont-nl : ver: 2006.04.05 20:06  fmt: 2006.4.6  mes:  
dutch

So, I wonder if I am misunderstanding something.What is wrong with  
using fmtutil to produce cont-en.fmt?

G

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Taco Hoekwater]

Gerben Wierda wrote:
> On 6 Apr 2006, at 18:06, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> 
> So, I wonder if I am misunderstanding something.What is wrong with  
> using fmtutil to produce cont-en.fmt?

I guess that would work out more or less ok, but fmtutil cannot mimic
texexec's commandline options & system initialization (it writes a
temporary file with extra settings that is read during the format
generation)

Also fmtutil does not support the simultaneous existance of
context formats for different engines (that is why it can no longer
be used internally by texexec --make).


Cheers, taco

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Hans Hagen]

Gerben Wierda wrote:
> On 6 Apr 2006, at 18:06, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> All this confusion with the formats and their paths is why my teTeX
>> installation page starts with:
>>
>>    "De-install any existing teTeX"
>>
>> That really is the least confusing option, IMO. If you really do
>> not want to do that (because you only ever use pdftex, for example)
>> simply always copy the formats generated by texexec over the ones
>> generated by texconfig/fmtutil.
>>     
>
> Currently, my fmtutil produced formats work fine:
>
>                 texexec : TeXExec 5.4.3 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1997-2005
>                 texutil : TeXUtil 9.0.1 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1992-2006
>                     tex : pdfeTeX, 3.141592-1.30.4-2.2 (Web2C 7.5.5)
>                 context : ver: 2006.04.05 20:06
>                 cont-en : ver: 2006.04.05 20:06  fmt: 2006.4.6  mes:  
> english
>                 cont-nl : ver: 2006.04.05 20:06  fmt: 2006.4.6  mes:  
> dutch
>
> So, I wonder if I am misunderstanding something.What is wrong with  
> using fmtutil to produce cont-en.fmt?
>   
in the past we had fmt, efmt, ofmt, ... suffixes, one for each engine 
(pdfetex, aleph, xetex, ...)

to simplify source code maintainance, this was dropped in favour of one 
suffix, fmt

when this was discussed, the engine subpath (reflected in an $engine 
variable set at runtime) came up as a solution  to  differentiate 
between formats of engines, so:

web2c/pdfetex/whatever.fmt
web2c/aleph/whatever.fmt
web2c/xetex/whatever.fmt

and such. 

So, i adapted texexec to this. However, it was decided that tetex fmtutil would not support the engine feature. (if i'd known that in advance, i'd objected against dropping the suffixes)

for lates, this is normally no problem since there each engine has its own format name (latex, pdflatex, lambda, etc) while context has one format for all (code adapts itself and drivers are loaded at runtime) 

(this also means that in principle multiple nearly identical copies of latex and plain are present, but one copy of context, unless one runs multiple user interfaces) 

so, as long as you generate formats with fmtutil, tex will find them in 

web2c/

when texexec is used, it will create the engine paths and use them; however, depending on the version of texlive / texexec, there may be a clash when there is: 

web2c/cont-en.fmt (could be for pdfetex, aleph or xetex) 

web2c/pdfetex/cont-en.fmt 
web2c/aleph/cont-en.fmt 
web2c/xetex/cont-en.fmt 

now, it depends on how formats are looked up; if it's: 

  web2c//

then you're in trouble since it will never find the engine subpaths, so the better definition is (in tex live if i'm right, but maybe not in tetex) 

web2/{engine,}//

which will first take the engine specific format and next the whatever one, 

so, if gwtex uses web2/{engine,}// texexec generated formats will be used, when present, and otherwise fmtutil ones; using fmtutil and texexec --make mixed may give problems 

[(new)texexec, at runtime, will fix the engine path using an environment variable unless it is set] 

as usual, changes like this (as with lm and so) never are without problems and because context follows such things closely, its users have to pay the price of progress  


Hans 

(btw, due to the suffix change, there are probably old efmt files around)  



-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Sanjoy Mahajan]

Hans Hagen wrote:

> well, either use texconfig to generate context formats or use 
> texexec --make
> 
> texconfig does not support the $engine subpath feature (too difficult
> to implement) but we need this in order to distinguish between
> formats for pdftex, aleph and xetex

Success:

$ texexec --version

 TeXExec 5.4.3 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE 1997-2005

               texexec : TeXExec 5.4.3 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE
               1997-2005
               texutil : TeXUtil 9.0.1 - ConTeXt / PRAGMA ADE
               1992-2006
                   tex : pdfeTeX, 3.141592-1.21a-2.2 (Web2C 7.5.4)
               context : ver: 2006.03.25 13:21
               cont-en : ver: 2006.03.25 13:21  fmt: 2006.4.6  mes:
               english


Taco Hoekwater wrote:

> All this confusion with the formats and their paths is why my teTeX
> installation page starts with:
>
>   "De-install any existing teTeX"
>
> That really is the least confusing option, IMO. If you really do not
> want to do that (because you only ever use pdftex, for example)
> simply always copy the formats generated by texexec over the ones
> generated by texconfig/fmtutil.

I followed the Debian installation page using apt-get for the
latin-modern and cm-super fonts.  Probably many Debian users prefer
that method rather than the raw tetex method.  For one, xpdf has
recurring buffer overruns being discovered, and tetex (at least on
Debian) gets updated with the fixes -- and you want an installation
method that brings in the fix without having to reinstall everything
including context.

So what I did mixes in some of your raw tetex installation
instructions.  I already had tetex-3.0 and a .texmf-var directory from
the texconfig run to switch to letter paper, and (Debian's?)
tetex-3.0's texmf.cnf puts formats there.  So (once I had run texexec
--make):

* comment out the mptopdf, cont-en, and metafun lines in
  /etc/texmf/fmt.d/01tetex.cnf, so that fmtutil won't try to make them
  again.

* deleted the ~/.texmf-var/web2c/{cont-en,mptopdf}.fmt (I didn't have
  any metafun formats or I would delete them too).

* did "(cd ; kpsewhich  --format=fmt cont-en )" to find any other
  instances of cont-en.fmt, and then remove it:
    rm /var/lib/texmf/web2c/cont-en.fmt
  Same for mptopdf and (if any) metafun.

* Edited the TEXFORMATS line in /etc/texmf/texmf.d/45TeXinputs.cnf to
  have the /{$engine,} magic:
     TEXFORMATS = .;$TEXMF/web2c/{$engine,}

* As root, ran update-texmf to regenerate /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf

* Checked whether the new formats are found:
    $ (cd ; kpsewhich -format=fmt --engine=pdfetex cont-en mptopdf metafun)
    /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c/pdfetex/cont-en.fmt
    /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c/pdfetex/mptopdf.fmt
  (No metafun yet, but that's okay.)

* Looks okay, so run 'texexec --version' to see whether it really is okay.

Should I add these steps to the Wiki in the Debian installation page?

-Sanjoy

`Never underestimate the evil of which men of power are capable.'
         --Bertrand Russell, _War Crimes in Vietnam_, chapter 1.

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Taco Hoekwater]

Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
> 
> Should I add these steps to the Wiki in the Debian installation page?

Yes, please. But everything except the 'fmt.d' step sounds applicable
to other teTeX installations, so maybe you should create a completely
new 'teTeX update' page.

Cheers, taco

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Thomas A. Schmitz]

I wrote something about updating ConteXt in Fedora Core 5. INstead of  
creating a new page, see if this is applicable to your situation and  
if you can confirm/correct/delete information here:
http://wiki.contextgarden.net/ 
Linux_Installation#Updating_a_Linux_Installation:_Fedora_Core_5

Thomas

On Apr 6, 2006, at 9:36 PM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

> Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
>>
>> Should I add these steps to the Wiki in the Debian installation page?
>
> Yes, please. But everything except the 'fmt.d' step sounds applicable
> to other teTeX installations, so maybe you should create a completely
> new 'teTeX update' page.
>
> Cheers, taco
> _______________________________________________
> ntg-context mailing list
> ntg-context@ntg.nl
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Sanjoy Mahajan]

From:    Taco Hoekwater <taco@elvenkind.com>
> > Should I add these steps to the Wiki in the Debian installation page?
> 
> Yes, please. But everything except the 'fmt.d' step sounds applicable
> to other teTeX installations, so maybe you should create a completely
> new 'teTeX update' page.

I agree, but the perfect is the enemy of the good so I just put the
instructions on the Debian page for review (hopefully it's all okay).
Pieces can be transplanted to the generic tetex page as people check
them and find them okay.

From:    Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl>
> > that method rather than the raw tetex method.  For one, xpdf has
> > recurring buffer overruns being discovered, and tetex (at least on
> >   
> afaik this does not affect pdftex, since it uses only a small part of 
> the xpdf library

You're right.  But tetex-3.0 gets updated quite often for various
reasons (15 updates in the last 12 months, from 3.0-1 to 3.0-15), and
I wanted to make a setup that doesn't involve any extra steps when
that happens (except for the one I cannot avoid now, reupdating
metapost to 0.901 -- but I sent Taco a Makefile to automate most of
that).

> > * deleted the ~/.texmf-var/web2c/{cont-en,mptopdf}.fmt (I didn't have
> >   any metafun formats or I would delete them too).
> >   
> hm, i could let texexec do that

That would be good.  Then I could delete that info from the Wiki
page.

> > * did "(cd ; kpsewhich  --format=fmt cont-en )" to find any other
> >   instances of cont-en.fmt, and then remove it:
> >     rm /var/lib/texmf/web2c/cont-en.fmt
> >   Same for mptopdf and (if any) metafun.
> >   
> if you use newtexexe it will report more details about what it finds (it 
> is also more clever in making formats)

I'll have to try it -- although first I want to understand all the
corner cases with texexec.  Context folks develop software faster than
I can even read about it!  By the way, where is newtexexec?  I see the
newtexexec.rb in the .zip file, and could presumably run it with ruby,
but where is it supposed to end up?

> > * As root, ran update-texmf to regenerate /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf
> >   
> ah ...  i hate that kind of duplications ... a source of hard to trace 
> problems;  the teds (tex directory structure) is around for a while and 
> rather stable so i wonder why such config files have to en dup in etc; 
> just don't call it a config file; also, the kpse texmf.cnf model 
> provides for multiple cnf files

They preserve the TDS with a symlink: /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
points to the /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf file.

> i remember from long ago that there's also some path trickery involved 
> (btw, i'm not sure where the binaries live)

Hmm, tell me more about that if you remember.

-Sanjoy

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Hans Hagen]

Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
> I'll have to try it -- although first I want to understand all the
> corner cases with texexec.  Context folks develop software faster than
> I can even read about it!  By the way, where is newtexexec?  I see the
> newtexexec.rb in the .zip file, and could presumably run it with ruby,
> but where is it supposed to end up?
>   
it is supposed to stay there and be launched using texmfstart (alsl ruby)

Hans
>   
>> i remember from long ago that there's also some path trickery involved 
>> (btw, i'm not sure where the binaries live)
>>     
>
> Hmm, tell me more about that if you remember.
>   
well, tetex adding tex related bin paths to the (user) profile files which then could clash with other tex installations 



Hans 


-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Sanjoy Mahajan]

From:    Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl>
> >> i remember from long ago that there's also some path trickery involved 
> >> (btw, i'm not sure where the binaries live)
> >>     
> >
> > Hmm, tell me more about that if you remember.
> >   
> well, tetex adding tex related bin paths to the (user) profile files
> which then could clash with other tex installations 

That is hopefully a thing of the past.  I just checked all the
texmf.cnf files it sees, and it's only the system default even though
I have ~/.texmf-{config,var} directories made by tetex.  

  $ kpsewhere texmf.cnf
  /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
  /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
  /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
  /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
  /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
  /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
  /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
  /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf

This global texmf.cnf includes those two directories by default (at
least with tetex-3.0).  A snip from there:

TEXMFHOME = $HOME/texmf
TEXMFVAR = $HOME/.texmf-var
TEXMFCONFIG = $HOME/.texmf-config
TEXMF = {$TEXMFCONFIG,$TEXMFVAR,$TEXMFHOME,$TEXMFSYSCONFIG,!!$TEXMFSYSVAR,!!$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFDIST}

-Sanjoy

`Never underestimate the evil of which men of power are capable.'
         --Bertrand Russell, _War Crimes in Vietnam_, chapter 1.

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Hans Hagen]

Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
> From:    Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl>
>   
>>>> i remember from long ago that there's also some path trickery involved 
>>>> (btw, i'm not sure where the binaries live)
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Hmm, tell me more about that if you remember.
>>>   
>>>       
>> well, tetex adding tex related bin paths to the (user) profile files
>> which then could clash with other tex installations 
>>     
>
> That is hopefully a thing of the past.  I just checked all the
> texmf.cnf files it sees, and it's only the system default even though
> I have ~/.texmf-{config,var} directories made by tetex.  
>
>   $ kpsewhere texmf.cnf
>   /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
>   /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
>   /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
>   /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
>   /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
>   /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
>   /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
>   /usr/share/texmf/web2c/texmf.cnf
>
>   
  tmftools texmf.cnf

shows what file is used,

  textools  --find texmf.cnf

does a more extensive search

> This global texmf.cnf includes those two directories by default (at
> least with tetex-3.0).  A snip from there:
>
> TEXMFHOME = $HOME/texmf
> TEXMFVAR = $HOME/.texmf-var
> TEXMFCONFIG = $HOME/.texmf-config
> TEXMF = {$TEXMFCONFIG,$TEXMFVAR,$TEXMFHOME,$TEXMFSYSCONFIG,!!$TEXMFSYSVAR,!!$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFDIST}
>   
indeed, quite some paths (i hope that $TEXMFPROJECT will make it into 
there, although when i proposed that some reactions were that we already 
have too many paths; interesting since most of the funny config/var/sys 
ones mentioned in your example are probably empty anyway)

Hans

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: version dates confuse me after upgrade

[Hans Hagen]

Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
> that method rather than the raw tetex method.  For one, xpdf has
> recurring buffer overruns being discovered, and tetex (at least on
>   
afaik this does not affect pdftex, since it uses only a small part of 
the xpdf library

> * deleted the ~/.texmf-var/web2c/{cont-en,mptopdf}.fmt (I didn't have
>   any metafun formats or I would delete them too).
>   
hm, i could let texexec do that
> * did "(cd ; kpsewhich  --format=fmt cont-en )" to find any other
>   instances of cont-en.fmt, and then remove it:
>     rm /var/lib/texmf/web2c/cont-en.fmt
>   Same for mptopdf and (if any) metafun.
>   
if you use newtexexe it will report more details about what it finds (it 
is also more clever in making formats)
> * Edited the TEXFORMATS line in /etc/texmf/texmf.d/45TeXinputs.cnf to
>   have the /{$engine,} magic:
>      TEXFORMATS = .;$TEXMF/web2c/{$engine,}
>   
texexec / newtexexec dixes that runtime; afaik the tex live texmf.cnf 
file has engine support (so i expected tetex to provide that as well, 
even if it's not used)
> * As root, ran update-texmf to regenerate /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf
>   
ah ...  i hate that kind of duplications ... a source of hard to trace 
problems;  the teds (tex directory structure) is around for a while and 
rather stable so i wonder why such config files have to en dup in etc; 
just don't call it a config file; also, the kpse texmf.cnf model 
provides for multiple cnf files

i remember from long ago that there's also some path trickery involved 
(btw, i'm not sure where the binaries live)

(btw, beware not to install tex live and tetex alongside )
> * Checked whether the new formats are found:
>     $ (cd ; kpsewhich -format=fmt --engine=pdfetex cont-en mptopdf metafun)
>     /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c/pdfetex/cont-en.fmt
>     /home/sanjoy/.texmf-var/web2c/pdfetex/mptopdf.fmt
>   (No metafun yet, but that's okay.)
>
> * Looks okay, so run 'texexec --version' to see whether it really is okay.
>   
newtexexec --check
> Should I add these steps to the Wiki in the Debian installation page?
>   
sure 

Hans 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
     tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                             | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------