Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: dvipost - latex post filter command
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190071
------- Additional Comments From mpeters@mac.com 2006-05-06 02:58 EST ------- (In reply to comment #18)
- In my opinion the following should be used to detect %_texmf, since
in configure kpsewhich is also used (even though a bit differently but I believe the result is the same) %{!?_texmf: %define _texmf %(eval "echo
`kpsewhich -expand-var '$TEXMFMAIN'`")}
I agree, we should probably harmonize this in rules for tetex derived packages. Reading other tetex-* packages both ways are used.
In this case - using %{!?_texmf: %define blah} should probably not be used since configure doesn't take an arguement for what texmf to use.
So if I did
rpmbuild --define '_texmf /mnt/nfs/my_texmf' --rebuild foo.src.rpm
the package might fail because kpsewhich in configure would pick up TEXMFMAIN instead of what the macro defines.
Once upstream adds a configure switch to optionally specify the texmf, then allowing a custom texmf in the spec file via setting a macro makes sense.
Upstream should probably be bugged about that. If I was building it from source, I would want it in TEXMFLOCAL (or in my home dir texmf) - so it should be a configure switch (and probably should default to TEXMFLOCAL if no arguement is given to configure)