[RFU] TeX Live 2012 (texlive-20120628-1, etc.)

[Ken Brown]

On 8/3/2012 3:20 PM, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>
> Ken Brown writes:
>> 1. When creating the various texlive-collection-* packages, instead of
>> creating postinstall scripts, I would drop files into
>> /usr/share/texmf-dist/postinstall containing the postinstall
>> information.
>
> Exactly, although you could change that place of course (I've started
> with /etc/postinstall/texlive.d/, but that looked too wierd to me and
> I've moved it to texmf-dist).  And removing a package removes that file
> again from there.

I'm not crazy about the idea of using texmf-dist for files that are not 
part of the upstream distribution.  Maybe /etc/texmf (a.k.a. 
TEXMFSYSCONFIG) would be a better place.

> Another thing: I've created an (empty) directory /usr/share/texmf-site
> since there are some texlive scripts that produce a warning if that

Can you tell me which scripts are producing that warning?  I know it's 
minor, but I'd like to get rid of annoyances.

> directory does not exist.  I'm still getting a warning about
> non-activated kanji maps, but since I don't use any kanji I guess that's
> OK.

This shouldn't be happening with the current preremove/postinstall 
scripts, but cygwin-apps isn't really the place to discuss it.

>> 2. There would be a new package, say _texlive-postinstall, which would
>> take care of the postinstall tasks, with arguments lumped together
>> when possible.  I guess the various files in
>> /usr/share/texmf-dist/postinstall would have to be renamed (with the
>> addition of ".done"?) afterwards.
>
> There are multiple possibilities: you could provide the postinstall
> script via an extra package that is automagically updating like
> autorebase or update_info and make that postinstall package a dependency
> (although I don't think that would be appropriate here, all things
> considered).
>
> Or you could drop the same postinstall script from all texlive packages
> that need one, so you'd overwrite that script multiple times when more
> than one package is selected (this seems the easiest way to do it to
> me).

Yaakov, do you have an opinion about all this?  Unless you see a 
downside, I could try to write a patch for cygport to implement some 
version of Achim's idea.

Ken