New comment by tornaria on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/47130#issuecomment-1889342098

Comment:
> Thanks; applied those two.
> 
> Re: texdoc, I'm not certain of the best way to attack that at this point. We can't include the docs in the main package - they're HUGE. They don't seem to be included in any tarball. This is something I'd prefer to address in a follow up PR.

I think the docs are (optionally?) produced when each TL package is built, and placed in `$TEXMFDIST/doc/`. I think arch creates these TL packages without the documentation (each `*.xz` file inside `texlive-core-2023.66587-src.zip` and friends is one TL package) and makes this zip files with collections of packages.

In spite of the name, I don't think these files `texlive-core-2023.66587-src.zip` are texlive sources, and I don't think the arch package uses those, rather something more like `texlive-20230313-texmf.tar.xz`. That one file seems to contain everything, source, runtime and documentation for all the collections together. Then there's `texlive-20230311-tlpdb-full.tar.gz` which contains the database of installed files; arch seems to parse the database to split the texmf runtime files into collections, and I think all the documentation goes together in a single package (but documentation could also be split by collections).

TL;DR
 - the docs are included in `texlive-20230313-texmf.tar.xz`
 - the database with meta information of all those files is in `texlive-20230311-tlpdb-full.tar.gz`
 - maybe it's possible to eventually transition to using those files to generate all collections and documentation of collections (and also ship the database which I think is needed by texdoc)


Another note: I think texlive expects the `tlpkg` directory to be placed in `/usr/share/tlpkg` instead of `/usr/share/texmf-dist/tlpkg`. Simple way to fix this is to make a symlink, and I think doing this gets rid of some patches here.