On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 9:18 AM Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu> wrote:
Since xindy isn't really something that can be relied upon, is
it
possible (or reasonable) to do this globally in our sphinx packages?
Even when it was enabled, it was architecture-limited which would
force that limitation to propagate down to potentially anything that
used sphinx. (xindy is written in LISP and builds with clisp. There's
a certain irony in that Jerry is also a maintainer of clisp.)
Yes, I am, and nobody ever mentioned xindy problems to me. There were
no bugs filed against clisp, no email messages to me, nothing. If I'd
known about these problems, I would have helped look into them.
I do think that the disabling of xindy was supposed to be only
temporary
so I think it could be re-enabled, but having it off probably makes
texlive maintenance easier. The proper solution, I guess, is to fix
clisp to work on s390x and then fix whatever issues prevent xindy from
being enabled all the time. I think it would help to remove it from
texlive-base entirely and let it stand on its own. That way issues with
it wouldn't prevent texlive-base from building.
The clisp issue with s390x has been on my TODO list for a long time.
I've been using most of my Fedora time to hunt down bugs that keep
other packages from building at all. I seem to be reaching the end of
that, at last, so I'll try to figure this out next.
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/