UPDATE: texlive 2011

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
Hi,

Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.

I say WIP because it is only tested amd64 and the upgrade paths have not been
tested. I post it because I know there are a brave few who would like to test.

If you would like to help, please reply to the thread with test results and bugs.

Can someone try this on PPC?

Cheers

gzip attached ( >32k lines of diff ).

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

tl2011.diff.gz (267K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
Anyone?
On Sep 13, 2011 1:40 PM, "Edd Barrett" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
>
> I say WIP because it is only tested amd64 and the upgrade paths have not
been
> tested. I post it because I know there are a brave few who would like to
test.
>
> If you would like to help, please reply to the thread with test results
and bugs.

>
> Can someone try this on PPC?
>
> Cheers
>
> gzip attached ( >32k lines of diff ).
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Edd Barrett
>
> http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Amit Kulkarni-5
In reply to this post by Edd Barrett
> Hi,
>
> Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
>
> I say WIP because it is only tested amd64 and the upgrade paths have not been
> tested. I post it because I know there are a brave few who would like to test.
>
> If you would like to help, please reply to the thread with test results and bugs.
>
> Can someone try this on PPC?
>
> Cheers
>
> gzip attached ( >32k lines of diff ).
>

The patch didn't apply cleanly. I fixed it manually though.

# find . -name "*.rej"
./base/Makefile.rej
./texmf/Makefile.rej

Will report on amd64!

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Amit Kulkarni-5
> The patch didn't apply cleanly. I fixed it manually though.
>
> # find . -name "*.rej"
> ./base/Makefile.rej
> ./texmf/Makefile.rej
>
> Will report on amd64!
>

Ahhh sorry, this was after espie@ infrastrucutre fix.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Amit Kulkarni-5
In reply to this post by Edd Barrett
> Hi,
>
> Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
>
> I say WIP because it is only tested amd64 and the upgrade paths have not been
> tested. I post it because I know there are a brave few who would like to test.
>
> If you would like to help, please reply to the thread with test results and bugs.
>
> Can someone try this on PPC?
>
> Cheers
>
> gzip attached ( >32k lines of diff ).


Edd,

I think you forgot to do make plist...can you double check? i am on amd64...

thanks

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Paul Irofti-4
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 03:04:22PM -0500, Amit Kulkarni wrote:

> > Hi,
> >
> > Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
> >
> > I say WIP because it is only tested amd64 and the upgrade paths have not been
> > tested. I post it because I know there are a brave few who would like to test.
> >
> > If you would like to help, please reply to the thread with test results and bugs.
> >
> > Can someone try this on PPC?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > gzip attached ( >32k lines of diff ).
>
>
> Edd,
>
> I think you forgot to do make plist...can you double check? i am on amd64...

Sounds like edd

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
In reply to this post by Amit Kulkarni-5
You don't run make plist  for texlive. The plist is scripted. Perhaps the
diff is busted, it works mega clean here.
On Sep 22, 2011 9:04 PM, "Amit Kulkarni" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
>>
>> I say WIP because it is only tested amd64 and the upgrade paths have not
been
>> tested. I post it because I know there are a brave few who would like to
test.
>>
>> If you would like to help, please reply to the thread with test results
and bugs.

>>
>> Can someone try this on PPC?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> gzip attached ( >32k lines of diff ).
>
>
> Edd,
>
> I think you forgot to do make plist...can you double check? i am on
amd64...
>
> thanks
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
In reply to this post by Edd Barrett
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 01:47:39PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.

Here is the latest diff I am working with.

I have tried:
 * install on amd64
 * install on i386
 * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on amd64)
 * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on i386)

All of the above have worked seamlessy.

Now I am waiting for a sparc64 build to complete.

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

tl11.1.diff.gz (267K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 03:00:21PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 01:47:39PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
>
> Here is the latest diff I am working with.
>
> I have tried:
>  * install on amd64
>  * install on i386
>  * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on amd64)
>  * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on i386)
>
> All of the above have worked seamlessy.
>
> Now I am waiting for a sparc64 build to complete.

Works great on sparc64.

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Nigel Taylor-3
In reply to this post by Edd Barrett
On 09/28/11 15:00, Edd Barrett wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 01:47:39PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
>
> Here is the latest diff I am working with.
>
> I have tried:
>  * install on amd64
>  * install on i386
>  * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on amd64)
>  * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on i386)
>
> All of the above have worked seamlessy.
>
> Now I am waiting for a sparc64 build to complete.
>
Hi,

For print/texlive/base, make print-package-signature does not match
pkg_info -S, causing unnecessary rebuilds, this is because of the

LIB_DEPENDS +=         devel/ffcall

which is not required, there is already a BUILD_DEPENDS for clisp.
clisp has a LIB_DEPENDS for ffcall and avcall callback in the WANTLIB,
ensuring ffcall is installed at runtime with clisp. The only requirement
I can find so far for ffcall in print/texlive/base, is related to the
building and running of clisp, and not directly to this port.

From the xindy INSTALL file, the requirement is "the clisp command
must be available at build and runtime". The texlive/base RUN_DEPENDS doesn't
include clisp (on amd64 where xinidy is enabled). Looking at the
installed perl script for xindy clearly this uses clisp.

$ fgrep clisp /usr/local/share/texmf/scripts/xindy/xindy.pl
our $clisp = ( $is_windows ? 'clisp.exe' : 'clisp' ) ;
    # clisp runtime
    $clisp = $xindy_run  if -e $xindy_run;
    my @command = ($clisp, '-M', $mem_file, '-E', 'iso-8859-1');
#     xindy.run does not exist any more, call clisp directly.


The change below has been tried by removing all installed packages,
then building print/texlive/base, on amd64 current.

Nigel

--- Makefile.orig       Wed Sep 28 19:35:22 2011
+++ Makefile    Wed Sep 28 21:45:47 2011
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
 # clisp limits which arches we can use xindy on
 .if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "i386" || ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "amd64"
 BUILD_DEPENDS +=       lang/clisp
-LIB_DEPENDS +=         devel/ffcall
+RUN_DEPENDS +=         lang/clisp
 CONFIGURE_ARGS +=      --enable-xindy \
                        --disable-xindy-rules
 PKG_ARGS +=            -Dxindy=1 # Note. texmf-full required for xindy

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:39:56PM +0100, Nigel Taylor wrote:
> -LIB_DEPENDS +=         devel/ffcall
> +RUN_DEPENDS +=         lang/clisp

Finding if ffcal was actually needed was actually on my TODO list.
Thanks

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Amit Kulkarni-5
Thanks a bunch, this should reduce dpb rebuilds a lot.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Edd Barrett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:39:56PM +0100, Nigel Taylor wrote:
>> -LIB_DEPENDS +=         devel/ffcall
>> +RUN_DEPENDS +=         lang/clisp
>
> Finding if ffcal was actually needed was actually on my TODO list.
> Thanks
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Edd Barrett
>
> http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Amit Kulkarni-5
In reply to this post by Nigel Taylor-3
> >> Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
> >
> > Here is the latest diff I am working with.
> >
> > I have tried:
> >  * install on amd64
> >  * install on i386
> >  * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on amd64)
> >  * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on i386)
> >
> > All of the above have worked seamlessy.
> >
> > Now I am waiting for a sparc64 build to complete.
> >
> Hi,
>
> For print/texlive/base, make print-package-signature does not match
> pkg_info -S, causing unnecessary rebuilds, this is because of the
>
> LIB_DEPENDS +=         devel/ffcall
>
> which is not required, there is already a BUILD_DEPENDS for clisp.
> clisp has a LIB_DEPENDS for ffcall and avcall callback in the WANTLIB,
> ensuring ffcall is installed at runtime with clisp. The only requirement
> I can find so far for ffcall in print/texlive/base, is related to the
> building and running of clisp, and not directly to this port.
>
> From the xindy INSTALL file, the requirement is "the clisp command
> must be available at build and runtime". The texlive/base RUN_DEPENDS doesn't
> include clisp (on amd64 where xinidy is enabled). Looking at the
> installed perl script for xindy clearly this uses clisp.
>
> $ fgrep clisp /usr/local/share/texmf/scripts/xindy/xindy.pl
> our $clisp = ( $is_windows ? 'clisp.exe' : 'clisp' ) ;
>     # clisp runtime
>     $clisp = $xindy_run  if -e $xindy_run;
>     my @command = ($clisp, '-M', $mem_file, '-E', 'iso-8859-1');
> #     xindy.run does not exist any more, call clisp directly.
>
>
> The change below has been tried by removing all installed packages,
> then building print/texlive/base, on amd64 current.
>
> Nigel
>
> --- Makefile.orig       Wed Sep 28 19:35:22 2011
> +++ Makefile    Wed Sep 28 21:45:47 2011
> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
>  # clisp limits which arches we can use xindy on
>  .if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "i386" || ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "amd64"
>  BUILD_DEPENDS +=       lang/clisp
> -LIB_DEPENDS +=         devel/ffcall
> +RUN_DEPENDS +=         lang/clisp
>  CONFIGURE_ARGS +=      --enable-xindy \
>                         --disable-xindy-rules
>  PKG_ARGS +=            -Dxindy=1 # Note. texmf-full required for xindy

minor nit.

since this is a i386/amd64 and both are shared lib arches, we can simply
change BUILD_DEPENDS on lang/clisp to LIB_DEPENDS, and drop devel/ffcall.

bsd.port.mk says LIB_DEPENDS almost euqivalent to BUILD_DEPENDS &
RUN_DEPENDS on shared lib arches.

thanks

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Nigel Taylor-3
On 09/29/11 17:17, Amit Kulkarni wrote:

>>>> Here is a WIP update of texlive 2011.
>>>
>>> Here is the latest diff I am working with.
>>>
>>> I have tried:
>>>  * install on amd64
>>>  * install on i386
>>>  * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on amd64)
>>>  * upgrade from -current/texlive-2010 -> texlive-2011 (on i386)
>>>
>>> All of the above have worked seamlessy.
>>>
>>> Now I am waiting for a sparc64 build to complete.
>>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> For print/texlive/base, make print-package-signature does not match
>> pkg_info -S, causing unnecessary rebuilds, this is because of the
>>
>> LIB_DEPENDS +=         devel/ffcall
>>
>> which is not required, there is already a BUILD_DEPENDS for clisp.
>> clisp has a LIB_DEPENDS for ffcall and avcall callback in the WANTLIB,
>> ensuring ffcall is installed at runtime with clisp. The only requirement
>> I can find so far for ffcall in print/texlive/base, is related to the
>> building and running of clisp, and not directly to this port.
>>
>> From the xindy INSTALL file, the requirement is "the clisp command
>> must be available at build and runtime". The texlive/base RUN_DEPENDS doesn't
>> include clisp (on amd64 where xinidy is enabled). Looking at the
>> installed perl script for xindy clearly this uses clisp.
>>
>> $ fgrep clisp /usr/local/share/texmf/scripts/xindy/xindy.pl
>> our $clisp = ( $is_windows ? 'clisp.exe' : 'clisp' ) ;
>>     # clisp runtime
>>     $clisp = $xindy_run  if -e $xindy_run;
>>     my @command = ($clisp, '-M', $mem_file, '-E', 'iso-8859-1');
>> #     xindy.run does not exist any more, call clisp directly.
>>
>>
>> The change below has been tried by removing all installed packages,
>> then building print/texlive/base, on amd64 current.
>>
>> Nigel
>>
>> --- Makefile.orig       Wed Sep 28 19:35:22 2011
>> +++ Makefile    Wed Sep 28 21:45:47 2011
>> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
>>  # clisp limits which arches we can use xindy on
>>  .if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "i386" || ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "amd64"
>>  BUILD_DEPENDS +=       lang/clisp
>> -LIB_DEPENDS +=         devel/ffcall
>> +RUN_DEPENDS +=         lang/clisp
>>  CONFIGURE_ARGS +=      --enable-xindy \
>>                         --disable-xindy-rules
>>  PKG_ARGS +=            -Dxindy=1 # Note. texmf-full required for xindy
>
> minor nit.
>
> since this is a i386/amd64 and both are shared lib arches, we can simply
> change BUILD_DEPENDS on lang/clisp to LIB_DEPENDS, and drop devel/ffcall.
>
> bsd.port.mk says LIB_DEPENDS almost euqivalent to BUILD_DEPENDS &
> RUN_DEPENDS on shared lib arches.
>
> thanks
>
Hi,

The LIB_DEPENDS, is the very reason why the make print-package-signature
doesn't match the pkg_info -S for ports, and why there is a rebuild
problem, on a number of ports.

See man library-specs(7)

RUN_DEPENDS always creates a @depends line, LIB_DEPENDS doesn't.

clisp is required for building, and running the port, it is not required
for the libraries as using LIB_DEPENDS implies.

make print-package-signature assumes LIB_DEPENDS will be turned into a
@depends, that there is a matching WANTLIB library to be using the
LIB_DEPENDS in the first place. pkg_create drops the @depends when no
library can be found in the WANTLIB so pkg_info -S will have lost the
dependency and not appear in the signature, and signatures do not match.

Maybe make lib-depends-check should display warnings about any
LIB_DEPENDS package paths that don't have any of their libraries
appearing in the WANTLIB.

What you suggest will change the signature mismatch from devel/ffcall
to lang/clisp, there will be no run time @depends to install clisp in
the package created. I haven't tried your change because I have already
tried and tested the change above it solved the rebuild issue and
correctly installed clisp at runtime.


Nigel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Amit Kulkarni-5
> The LIB_DEPENDS, is the very reason why the make print-package-signature
> doesn't match the pkg_info -S for ports, and why there is a rebuild
> problem, on a number of ports.
>
> See man library-specs(7)
>
> RUN_DEPENDS always creates a @depends line, LIB_DEPENDS doesn't.
>
> clisp is required for building, and running the port, it is not required
> for the libraries as using LIB_DEPENDS implies.
>
> make print-package-signature assumes LIB_DEPENDS will be turned into a
> @depends, that there is a matching WANTLIB library to be using the
> LIB_DEPENDS in the first place. pkg_create drops the @depends when no
> library can be found in the WANTLIB so pkg_info -S will have lost the
> dependency and not appear in the signature, and signatures do not match.
>
> Maybe make lib-depends-check should display warnings about any
> LIB_DEPENDS package paths that don't have any of their libraries
> appearing in the WANTLIB.
>
> What you suggest will change the signature mismatch from devel/ffcall
> to lang/clisp, there will be no run time @depends to install clisp in
> the package created. I haven't tried your change because I have already
> tried and tested the change above it solved the rebuild issue and
> correctly installed clisp at runtime.
>

You are absolutely right, it rebuilds unnecessarily with whta I
suggested (need to read manpages more). sorry for the noise.

thanks

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 01:40:54PM -0500, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
> You are absolutely right, it rebuilds unnecessarily with whta I
> suggested (need to read manpages more). sorry for the noise.

Well, here is the latest diff. This is known to work on
sparc64/amd64/i386, update path from 2010->2011, update path from
2009->2010->2011.

This has recent reliability fixes included also.

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

tl11.diff.3.gz (268K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Alexander Shadchin
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 01:11:50PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 01:40:54PM -0500, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
> > You are absolutely right, it rebuilds unnecessarily with whta I
> > suggested (need to read manpages more). sorry for the noise.
>
> Well, here is the latest diff. This is known to work on
> sparc64/amd64/i386, update path from 2010->2011, update path from
> 2009->2010->2011.
>
> This has recent reliability fixes included also.
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Edd Barrett
>
> http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk


Small note (base/Makefile):
 ...
 # clisp limits which arches we can use xindy on
  .if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "i386" || ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "amd64"
 ...

Now clisp works on amd64, i386, powerpc and sparc64.
Maybe it makes sense to include xindy on powerpc and sparc64 arches?

--
Alexandr Shadchin

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 09:07:00PM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote:
> Now clisp works on amd64, i386, powerpc and sparc64.
> Maybe it makes sense to include xindy on powerpc and sparc64 arches?

Great. I will give that a go. New diff coming soon.

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 01:01:44PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 09:07:00PM +0600, Alexandr Shadchin wrote:
> > Now clisp works on amd64, i386, powerpc and sparc64.
> > Maybe it makes sense to include xindy on powerpc and sparc64 arches?
>
> Great. I will give that a go. New diff coming soon.

Sorry for the delay. Here goes with xindy on sparc64 and powerpc. Tested build on sparc64, looks good.

Do people think we are about ready to go with this?

Attached

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

tl11.4.diff.gz (268K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UPDATE: texlive 2011

Edd Barrett
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 11:47:23PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
> Attached

Same again with the latest wave of security/reliability fixes.

--
Best Regards
Edd Barrett

http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk

tl11.diff.5.gz (270K) Download Attachment
12