Re: INstalling a new version of context

Re: INstalling a new version of context

[bb]

> The upgrading of Context or even of pdftex is sufficiently
> failure prone that I have given up trying.

I tend to agree. I follow the meager instructions I have found, as
well as some direct help from hh himself and am still not able to get
it working right. I think the problem is with hacked engine support. I
try disabling the use of engine but I still get the same problem. At
this point I am tracking down a weird error in texexec.pl in which
kpsewhich returns a null result and TEXFORMATS gets set to '0'. This
wreaks havoc and breaks everything. I suspect texlive texmf.cnf
settings trigger a bug in texexec.

Perhaps everything would work just fine with the limited linux tex
distribution from pragma. But I, like many others, prefer to use
texlive because it is fairly comprehensive and I can use my normal
latex and friends. I think it would be a very useful exercise for hh
to install a complete texlive on a stock fedora box. Then write down
_every_ step necessary to get beta cont-tmf.zip installed and working.
I would think that targeting texlive as the standard platform for
distributing context on linux/unix would make the most sense. It
should _not_ be necessary to make anything but a trivial change to
texmf.cnf.

sc

Re: INstalling a new version of context

[Taco Hoekwater]

bb wrote:
> 
> I think it would be a very useful exercise for hh
> to install a complete texlive on a stock fedora box. 

I'm sure he would be happy to, if you provided the box and some
funding (!).
Most developers that work on free software miss at least
one of the following:

  * spare hardware
  * spare disk space
  * spare operating systems
  * spare time

> Then write down
> _every_ step necessary to get beta cont-tmf.zip installed and working.

I guess I could conceivably try to do this, as long as I only have to
do it once, but I will not be able to provide support for it afterwards.

I have a fairly complex TeX setup, and for that reason I do not
use texlive. I can try to write down this howto for *current* context
beta and *current* pdfetex, but afterwards I have to revert my system
back to 'normal operation' immediately, so there is no way for me to
keep on helping people after the initial installation.

Assuming someone volunteers to pick up supporting context-on-texlive
afterwards, then I am willing to write down the initial page.
But I do not want to waste a day fighting TeXlive for no good,
so unless I hear from someone, I will do nothing.

> I would think that targeting texlive as the standard platform for
> distributing context on linux/unix would make the most sense. It
> should _not_ be necessary to make anything but a trivial change to
> texmf.cnf.

Have you complained to the TeXlive maintainers as well? After all,
they are the distributors. Perhaps they could make it just a bit
easier to add stuff to an existing TeXlive install? The upgrade
path for  any TeXlive basically is: download an update iso image,
burn it, and re-install. There is no support for partial upgrades
(at least there wasn't last time I looked, which is, admittedly,
  a few years ago)

Taco

Re: INstalling a new version of context

[bb]

On 5/9/05, Taco Hoekwater <taco@elvenkind.com> wrote:
> bb wrote:
> >
> > I think it would be a very useful exercise for hh
> > to install a complete texlive on a stock fedora box.
> 
> I'm sure he would be happy to, if you provided the box and some
> funding (!).

Reading my own words I see how they don't exactly convey warm
appreciation for all the hard work that has been put into context.
Allow me to retract them and offer instead to help, as time, money,
and resources permit :-)

> > Then write down
> > _every_ step necessary to get beta cont-tmf.zip installed and working.
> 
> I guess I could conceivably try to do this, as long as I only have to
> do it once, but I will not be able to provide support for it afterwards.

I can understand your reluctance, especially since texlive has
installation and maintenance issues of its own, as you allude to
below. Since texlive 2005 is in the process of being worked out,
perhaps a better use of time would be to ensure that a fully
functional, up-to-date (and upgradable!) context gets included.

> I have a fairly complex TeX setup, and for that reason I do not
> use texlive. I can try to write down this howto for *current* context
> beta and *current* pdfetex, but afterwards I have to revert my system
> back to 'normal operation' immediately, so there is no way for me to
> keep on helping people after the initial installation.

It would be a very good thing if stock texlive could reside in texmf
and texmf-dist while your complex setup and bleeding edge stuff could
reside in texmf-var, texmf-local, texmf-fonts, texmf-extras, etc. I
can guess at several reasons why this might not be feasible. But it
would be a worthy goal for both texlive and context to make such
interoperability and upgradability  trivial. The current confusion
over engine support, for example, is simply maddening.

Texlive is the closest thing that exists to a standard TeX "platform".
One of its virtues, in my opinion, is its inflexibility. It is fairly
stable over time and does not vary significantly across distributions
like tetex does.

> 
> Assuming someone volunteers to pick up supporting context-on-texlive
> afterwards, then I am willing to write down the initial page.
> But I do not want to waste a day fighting TeXlive for no good,
> so unless I hear from someone, I will do nothing.

I am hesitant to accept your offer because I am afraid that my
problems will be exposed as pathetically easy to fix. Before you go to
the trouble, I will take some time to debug texexec.pl, which is where
I think the final problem is. If I succeed, I will post the recipe on
contextgarden.

> > I would think that targeting texlive as the standard platform for
> > distributing context on linux/unix would make the most sense. It
> > should _not_ be necessary to make anything but a trivial change to
> > texmf.cnf.
> 
> Have you complained to the TeXlive maintainers as well? 

Haven't I made enough enemies already :-)

Re: INstalling a new version of context

[Taco Hoekwater]

bb wrote:
> 
> Reading my own words I see how they don't exactly convey warm
> appreciation for all the hard work that has been put into context.

That's ok, i have written stuff in the not so distant past that
was much, much less appreciative. :-)

> below. Since texlive 2005 is in the process of being worked out,
> perhaps a better use of time would be to ensure that a fully
> functional, up-to-date (and upgradable!) context gets included.

It wouldn't stay up-to-date for the whole year, only for the first
six months or so. But you are right that the current (texlive2004)
situation is particularly messy, and an effort should be made to
make sure that the next texlive starts off with a more stable
situation.

Taco

Re: INstalling a new version of context

[bb]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2318 bytes --]

I think I have things working with texlive. I will reproduce the
installation to make sure I capture all steps. It basically comes down
to:

1) Install texlive 2004 to /usr/local/TeX

2) (possibly optional) Compile new pdftex, pdfetex and pdfxtex and
replace executable and pool files in /usr/local/TeX/bin/i386-linux/
and /usr/local/TeX/texmf-local/web2c/ respectively.

3) Install beta cont-tmf.zip into /usr/local/TeX/texmf-context

4) Edit /usr/local/TeX/texmf-local/web2c/texmf.cnf to include the
following modifications from the copy in /usr/local/TeX/texmf/web2c:
TEXMFCONTEXT=$SELFAUTOPARENT/texmf-context
TEXMF={$HOMETEXMF,!!$VARTEXMF,$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFCONTEXT,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFDIST}

5) wget http://www.pragma-ade.com/context/install/linuxtex.zip 
Unzip the file into a temporary directory and cd to tex/texmf-linux/bin.
Copy only the small stub scripts (all less than 50 bytes) to
/usr/local/TeX/bin/i386-linux overwriting similarly named executables.
Copy texmfstart to the same place, again overwriting the existing
executable. Delete the rest of the temporary linuxtex installation.

6) Update /usr/local/TeX/texmf-context/scripts/context/perl/texexec.pl
with the attached patch.

7) Download the latest lm fonts from CTAN and install them in the
correct folders in texmf-context.

8) Run updmap.

9) Run texexec --make --all

I'm sure I have forgotten some crucial step. Corrections and
simplifications are welcome.

On 5/9/05, Taco Hoekwater <taco@elvenkind.com> wrote:
> bb wrote:
> >
> > Reading my own words I see how they don't exactly convey warm
> > appreciation for all the hard work that has been put into context.
> 
> That's ok, i have written stuff in the not so distant past that
> was much, much less appreciative. :-)
> 
> > below. Since texlive 2005 is in the process of being worked out,
> > perhaps a better use of time would be to ensure that a fully
> > functional, up-to-date (and upgradable!) context gets included.
> 
> It wouldn't stay up-to-date for the whole year, only for the first
> six months or so. But you are right that the current (texlive2004)
> situation is particularly messy, and an effort should be made to
> make sure that the next texlive starts off with a more stable
> situation.
> 
> Taco
> 
>

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: texexec.pl.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch; name="texexec.pl.patch", Size: 1561 bytes --]

*** /usr/local/TeX/texmf-context/scripts/context/perl/texexec.pl	2005-04-21 18:16:27.000000000 -0400
--- /usr/local/TeX/texmf-local/scripts/context/perl/texexec.pl	2005-05-09 14:39:51.000000000 -0400
***************
*** 2305,2313 ****
          # fall back
          if ($FormatPath eq '') {
              if (($UseEnginePath)&&($EngineDone)) {
!                 $FormatPath = `$kpsewhich --engine=$EnginePath --expand-var=\$TEXFORMATS` ;
              } else {
!                 $FormatPath = `$kpsewhich --expand-var=\$TEXFORMATS` ;
              }
          }
          chomp $FormatPath ;
--- 2305,2313 ----
          # fall back
          if ($FormatPath eq '') {
              if (($UseEnginePath)&&($EngineDone)) {
!                 $FormatPath = `$kpsewhich --engine=$EnginePath --expand-var=\\\$TEXFORMATS` ;
              } else {
!                 $FormatPath = `$kpsewhich --expand-var=\\\$TEXFORMATS` ;
              }
          }
          chomp $FormatPath ;
***************
*** 2474,2480 ****
          $texformats = '' ;
      }
      if ($texformats eq '') {
!         $texformats = `kpsewhich --expand-var=\$TEXFORMATS`.chomp ;
      }
      if ($texformats !~ /web2c[\/\\].*\$ENGINE/) {
          $texformats =~ s/web2c/web2c\/{\$ENGINE,}/ ;
--- 2474,2481 ----
          $texformats = '' ;
      }
      if ($texformats eq '') {
!         $texformats = `kpsewhich --expand-var=\\\$TEXFORMATS` ;
!         chomp($texformats) ;
      }
      if ($texformats !~ /web2c[\/\\].*\$ENGINE/) {
          $texformats =~ s/web2c/web2c\/{\$ENGINE,}/ ;

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 139 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context

texexec.pl patch

[bb]

The patch in my previous message modifies texexec.pl so that some
characters are doubly escaped when kpsewhich is invoked. This strictly
trial and error, so I do not claim to know exactly what is going on.
But I suspect that \ and $ need to be protected from both perl and the
shell when included within `backward quotes`. Perhaps this is platform
or shell specific. My setup is bash on linux. Things seem to work with
texlive on linux now.

bb

On 5/9/05, bb <skip.collins@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think I have things working with texlive. I will reproduce the
> installation to make sure I capture all steps. It basically comes down
> to:
> 
> 1) Install texlive 2004 to /usr/local/TeX
> 
> 2) (possibly optional) Compile new pdftex, pdfetex and pdfxtex and
> replace executable and pool files in /usr/local/TeX/bin/i386-linux/
> and /usr/local/TeX/texmf-local/web2c/ respectively.
> 
> 3) Install beta cont-tmf.zip into /usr/local/TeX/texmf-context
> 
> 4) Edit /usr/local/TeX/texmf-local/web2c/texmf.cnf to include the
> following modifications from the copy in /usr/local/TeX/texmf/web2c:
> TEXMFCONTEXT=$SELFAUTOPARENT/texmf-context
> TEXMF={$HOMETEXMF,!!$VARTEXMF,$TEXMFLOCAL,!!$TEXMFCONTEXT,!!$TEXMFMAIN,!!$TEXMFDIST}
> 
> 5) wget http://www.pragma-ade.com/context/install/linuxtex.zip
> Unzip the file into a temporary directory and cd to tex/texmf-linux/bin.
> Copy only the small stub scripts (all less than 50 bytes) to
> /usr/local/TeX/bin/i386-linux overwriting similarly named executables.
> Copy texmfstart to the same place, again overwriting the existing
> executable. Delete the rest of the temporary linuxtex installation.
> 
> 6) Update /usr/local/TeX/texmf-context/scripts/context/perl/texexec.pl
> with the attached patch.
> 
> 7) Download the latest lm fonts from CTAN and install them in the
> correct folders in texmf-context.
> 
> 8) Run updmap.
> 
> 9) Run texexec --make --all
> 
> I'm sure I have forgotten some crucial step. Corrections and
> simplifications are welcome.
> 
> On 5/9/05, Taco Hoekwater <taco@elvenkind.com> wrote:
> > bb wrote:
> > >
> > > Reading my own words I see how they don't exactly convey warm
> > > appreciation for all the hard work that has been put into context.
> >
> > That's ok, i have written stuff in the not so distant past that
> > was much, much less appreciative. :-)
> >
> > > below. Since texlive 2005 is in the process of being worked out,
> > > perhaps a better use of time would be to ensure that a fully
> > > functional, up-to-date (and upgradable!) context gets included.
> >
> > It wouldn't stay up-to-date for the whole year, only for the first
> > six months or so. But you are right that the current (texlive2004)
> > situation is particularly messy, and an effort should be made to
> > make sure that the next texlive starts off with a more stable
> > situation.
> >
> > Taco
> >
> >
> 
> 
>

Re: INstalling a new version of context

[Hans Hagen]

bb wrote:

> It would be a very good thing if stock texlive could reside in texmf
> and texmf-dist while your complex setup and bleeding edge stuff could
> reside in texmf-var, texmf-local, texmf-fonts, texmf-extras, etc. I
> can guess at several reasons why this might not be feasible. But it
> would be a worthy goal for both texlive and context to make such
> interoperability and upgradability  trivial. The current confusion
> over engine support, for example, is simply maddening.
> 
> Texlive is the closest thing that exists to a standard TeX "platform".
> One of its virtues, in my opinion, is its inflexibility. It is fairly
> stable over time and does not vary significantly across distributions
> like tetex does.

>>Have you complained to the TeXlive maintainers as well? 
>  
> Haven't I made enough enemies already :-)

not yet -)

TeX Live is both a binary distribution and a collection of resources.

Normally context -as shipped with tex live- works ok, apart from changes in non 
context specific parts that went unnoticed (chnages in font names, changes in 
patterns, and such) which may lead to broken functionality.

Sebastian always tries to get the latest greatest context in there and tests it 
as well, so the problem is not in tex live as it is.

The binaries are a different story. There is a close relationship between 
binaries like pdftex, mpost on the one hand and kpse and texmf.cnf on the other 
hand; and then there are of course the scripts that call these programs.

It has always been kind of a struggle to make the scripts work for all 
platforms. The main reason for this is that the user interface of kpse is unix 
based and assumes a certain shell. Also, some associated scripts (fmtutil, 
updmap) are shell scripts. One can safely say that therefore tex live is mostly 
a unix distribution. History has learned that it's kind of tricky to keep the 
windows and unix versions in sync (if only because there are two source trees);

last year there has been several incompatible changes in tds and the binaries; 
to mention a few:

- the multiple suffixes (efmt,ofmt,fmt,xfmt,..) were replaced by one (fmt) under 
the assumption that the engine subpath would be used to distinguish between 
aleph, pdfetex, xetex, etc.; unfortunately in practice this is not supported due 
to the fact that it's too complex to incorporate in the form generating scripts;
---> this is why in texexec i need to deal with it myself and also need to catch 
old cases etc; shell escaping is thereby rather painful.

- font paths (enc/map) has changed in an downwards incompatible way ---> this 
can be repaired by the textools script

- as usual there were changes in patterns that went unnoticed ---> this is why i 
will start shipping context with its own pattern files

- the script paths has changed as well as the way to locate scripts in the tree; 
which is quite painful fro those who run tex in integrated environments --> this 
is solved by using texmfstart as stub [that way i can try to remain downward 
compatible]

keep in mind that some context users use aleph/pdfetex/xetex alongside and that 
many context users use fonts not present in the standard tree; so, we need to 
deal with that ourselves

now, on my main machine i use windows and on the webservers linux; i never had 
problems in getting things running on windows, but unxi has always been 
troublesome, esp in updating systems that had already some kind of tex 
installed; this is why i always use the minimal distributions on unix: 
setuptex.sh nicely isolated the tree from whatever present; it is a known fact 
that, although tex live is rathere closely related to tetex, one should not 
install both alongside: different selection, different installation etc; macosx 
is yet another story but as far as i can see, gerben does a good job in 
providing update paths (no surprose since tex on the mac is moving faster than 
the rest)

it may be good to know that the last user group dvd actually shipped with 
protext based on miktex; miktex also has an update policy; it would be 
interesting to see what happens with the miktex for unix announcement.

currently fptex (or its more extensive version xemtex) is maintained 
independently from the rest of tex live, thereby maing tex live more and more 
unix adventure (apart from the resources tree)

another source of confusion is the fact that each distribution ships with 
different trees (texmf, texmf-local, texmf.local, texmfte, texmfgw, texmf-dist, 
texmf-doc, etc); here i always merge the common part into texmf, and put context 
updates in texmf-local

if you want the best tree: take the texmf tree from the user group dvd; this is 
a merge of the tex live trees, a bunch of ctan goodies, extra fonts etc; 
personally i tend to consider manfred's tree as the default one

so ... it's a complex live out there

and .. don't blame the maintainers too much .. it's not trivial to keep track of 
all changes in operating systems, compilers, libraries, macro packages etc ... 
it's only unfortunate that the common binary base is developed in a bit too 
platform bound way [but i try to hide as much as possible by using texexec cum suis]


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
-----------------------------------------------------------------