On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 05:40, nomnex <nomnex(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: I use the following shell function: function texlive_setup() { export TLHOME=/opt/texlive/2011 # the TeXLive installation path export PATH=$TLHOME/bin/x86_64-linux:$PATH export MANPATH=$TLHOME/texmf/doc/man:$MANPATH # export INFOPATH=$TLHOME/texmf/doc/info:$INFOPATH } Hope this helps. -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.

Could show me how to set the paths correctly on a default LXDE F-15 install? Thanks. -- nomnex <nomnex(a)gmail.com&gt; Freenode: nomnex Registered Linux user #505281. Be counted at: http://linuxcounter.net

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 23:48, suvayu ali <fatkasuvayu+linux(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: I would also be interested to know if it is possible to not have hard dependencies on texlive for some packages[1], e.g. R, auctex, ooolatex etc. Then I can safely uninstall the Fedora TeXLive and use the DVD without keeping duplicates. [1] I am aware of creating dummy packages, but I'm not very comfortable with rpmbuild and haven't tried my hand at it. -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.

--- On Sat, 3/31/12, Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; wrote: Ok, here you go. With any Fedora version or texlive that is Fedora derived, try compiling: Download: http://www.mecmath.net/trig/trigbook-1.1-src.tar.gz Extract it and try to run $./trigbook.sh see how far you get? You will need to get picins.sty, at least. With official TeXLive from DVD, just picins.sty is needed. With Fedora's texlive?, I have no idea :( Try the next one: http://mecmath.net/calc3book-1.0-src.tar.gz Even the official TeXLive from DVD does not do this one, even that it has what Fedora has removed, it needs some metapost for 3d style files :(, http://www-math.univ-poitiers.fr/~phan/m3Dplain.html This book also asks for picins.sty so If you did the first one, it can be used for the second one. There are more, you can see a differential equations book and a real analysis book also: http://www.jirka.org/diffyqs/ Source is here: http://www.jirka.org/diffyqs/diffyqs.tar.gz I create build script: /*********** build script **************/ #!/bin/sh pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode diffyqs.tex pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode diffyqs.tex makeindex diffyqs pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode diffyqs.tex /*********** end build script **************/ run it, see how far you go. Try also the real analysis book: http://www.jirka.org/ra/realanal.tar.gz with similar build script. Copy the first build script to the new extracted directory and run $ sed -i 's|diffyqs.tex|realanal.tex|g' name-of-buildscriptused and run it. See how far you go. There are more examples, but one that is an excellent one is lshort. Try to build it, and see how far you get. http://tobi.oetiker.ch/lshort/lshort-5.01.src.tar.gz If it is done without hunting down a great deal of *.sty files, and packages, then I rest my case and won't beat up a dead horse. Otherwise, this is what I have been trying to let folks know about the state of TeX on Fedora. And Fedora stands for newer packages, newer technologies, and ..., with TeX and texlive2007 (official* again not the repo), tex and latex users[on fedora without repo] are shortchanged with the not so latest technologies that the tex/latex world has to offer :( Also for evidence as to Fedora was to include TeXLive 20XY in Fedora 1?, see this \begin{quote} New version texlive-2008 (to be in f12): * one single texlive package generating 3944 subpackages / 1065 MiB * spec file automagically generated from upstream metadata with http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/files/tl2008/t... * upstream collections/packages are separate source tarballs (one could update one small source tarball if a particular style needs update and doesn't need to repack the whole single tarball or patch it) * new texlive is maximally scalable depending on which features are needed: - basic installation needs only 12 MiB of packages to be downloaded! - essential features such as pdflatex is supported in this basic scheme * it is a full (not truncated or otherwise crippled) version of TeX Live \end{quote} http://web.archiveorange.com/archive/v/o4zV8OpE1ZTzzpopAuqz Was texlive 2008 ever in Fedora 12? Not even in Fedora 16 :( This is what I mean :( I will not question what they(developers/packagers) are trying to do, but it is not working as many would have liked it for to. Exactly! I understand this, and this does break some things in some cases. The rules are too stringent! And they prevent progress from being made :( Simple as that. Regards, Antonio

On 03/31/2012 11:54 AM, Rex Dieter wrote: One thought: is it important that you use TeX or just that you be able to format/typeset long documents, even books? In the latter case, you might want to check out Scribus, a FOSS page layout program that's in use commercially to lay out magazines and books. I can't tell if it fits your needs or not, but it may be worth checking out as it's in the repo. (I know; today's update included both Scribus and its documentation.)

On Sat, 2012-03-31 at 03:30 -0700, Antonio Olivares wrote: KerTeX is just another packaging of all the components that have been collected around TeX and LaTeX. It's not the packaging that's of concern here, it's the individual components. I'm sure including KerTeX would involve the same audit process. On the other hand, getting the TeXLive audit done will benefit KerTeX as well, as everything that's common to the two collections will have been properly vetted. -- Matthew Saltzman Clemson University Mathematical Sciences mjs AT clemson DOT edu

--- On Fri, 3/30/12, Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; wrote: That is good and I know that Fedora goes and checks everything, but the process takes too long, it is 2012 and since 2009 they have been trying to sort out the mess and have not:(. I apologize if I sound pessimist, but this is one reason why some folks just pop in the Texlive DVD and use that instead of the texlive which is available in Fedora :( I know that texlive* is a monster(BIG) and there are too many questions about legalities, and blah blah blah. Why could it not be in RPM fusion not free and people decide on their own to use it or not? There is a minimal package, i.e, one that is an a package called texlive-tetex, it with a fairly amount of review could be included and a big statement with a disclaimer. ***We cannot include the other packages that are included in official texlive because they do not meet the standards and or policies in place to be distributed by Fedora *** If you need to use these packages, please get them from another source. All of this may be preferred instead of just staying with TeXlive 2007 for a good while now :( If the things were so hard, how come not look at texlive 2007 and all the packages, just adapt the same packages and include texlive 2011 or the new texlive 2012 which is being worked on? ``Why and how to do a legal audit? Only packages licensed under a free license can successfully pass through review process, i.e. to be included into Fedora. If the licensing is clear, one needs to move the package including headline and title from any of sections to either Fedora approved or Fedora disapproved sections. Please state clearly which license is appropriate to a package if moved to Fedora approved, e.g. adobemapping - BSD. '' KerTeX is not the one being reviewed or is it? If it was to be included in Fedora, I'd say it should meet or exceed the requirements. It is based on the original work of the authors when it was public domain. There should be no problems. But again, who would review it and if so, and someone finds something that is wrong, will contacting the author suffice? And it should not take years to sort the mess out. My $0.02. Regards, Antonio

Antonio Olivares wrote: Imo, this is a mischaracterization. Read for yourself: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Features/TeXLiveLegalAudit#Why_and_how... -- rex

--- On Tue, 3/27/12, Antonio Olivares <olivares14031(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote: Forgot about something :( when getting the packages, ./latex.sh, /amstex.sh, etc. ========================================================== [students@localhost kerTeX]$ ./graphics(a)latex.sh install KERTEX_VERSION=0.9999.3.0 KERTEX_HOST=linux-x86_64-3.2.10-3.fc16.x86_64 KERTEX_SHELL=/bin/sh KERTEX_BINDIR=/usr/local/bin/kertex KERTEX_LIBDIR=/usr/local/share/kertex KERTEX_MANDIR=/usr/local/share/kertex/man KERTEX_USER0=root KERTEX_GROUP0=wheel graphics(a)latex.sh: latex: FOUND. cd: Fatal error: Certificate verification: Not trusted This is TeX, kerTeX C Version 3.1415926 ! I can't find file `graphics.ins'. <*> &latex graphics.ins Please type another input file name: ========================================================== To solve this: cd: Fatal error: Certificate verification: Not trusted Run from command line $ cat >~/.lftp/rc <<EOT $ and retry the installation of the packages. I knew I forgot something. Happy TeXing & LaTeXing Regards, Antonio

--- On Thu, 3/29/12, Rex Dieter <rdieter(a)math.unl.edu&gt; wrote: In case it is important to clarify, I will try to do so this statement: ``The packaging and patents are issues that hold TeXLive in Fedora back'' If one installs Fedora 15 or Fedora 16 and you type # yum install texlive or another app that will pull it in, say kile, or texmaker, one will get TeXlive 2007, no 2010, no 2011 and one has to use the the repo to get a newer one. If you get the one from the repo, it is crippled. It does not have all the things that are needed to build books, you can hunt down style files and packages, or try to yum install them, but this is just much easier to get the TeXlive DVD and install it and be done with it. With the fedora version of TeXLive you can't be done with it :( This is what I try to state. There are apparently too many issues and patents and ..., holding it back :( ====================================================================== From: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/TeXLive Current status Targeted release: Fedora 17 Last updated: 2011-11-06 Percentage of completion: 60% It was moved from Fedora 14, to Fedora 15, to Fedora 16, and now to Fedora 17. When will it be there? Fedora 25? 60%, that is not working for many tex and latex users that need to typset beautiful documents :( Scope Requires packaging or testing and/or enhancements in fedora infrastructure, currently 1627 new packages are to be reviewed and added. Dependencies need to do a license audit - done automatically because upstream metadata contains codes for package licenses need mass review for all packages before this feature is completed - DONE import of all of the ~1600 packages need to be finished all of the packages need to be built Contingency Plan Stay stuck with TeX Live 2007. ====================================================================== If I want some real work done, I just install TeXLive from DVD and I am good to go. To use a lightweight portable TeX distro, I find KerTeX to be very good. Issues with running the program(s)? Yes, a few bugs have been found and the author has done his best to patch them and release the fixes. Several fonts were not generated as not all fonts are present. When using dvips with the -G parameter this was causing some trouble. Issues with software licenses or patents? This is another thing and like I have mentioned, this is what holds (True TexLive Back from DVD). There are a great deal of many things removed because of the selective process of patents and ..., well you know the story :( Users just care about TeXing and LaTeXing documents, they need not worry about these things :( Who is going to sue? whom and why? One can't do much except simple TeXing and LaTeXing. One can do the same with KerTeX and it is smaller than the $ sed -i |limited|crippled|-insert-word-here| version of TeXLive that Fedora ships :( it is outdated texlive2007, and the texlive 2010, texlive 2011 never made its way into Fedora :( except for the repos by the texlive maintainer! Probably by Fedora 25 a genuine TeXLive could be in Fedora? but that is yet to be accomplished :( TeTeX was great for its time, but no one stepped up to the plate and continued the work by Thomas Esser. Now, since 2006 it has been depracated. Only TeXLive is available and people* make a big deal that it is too big, and they become selective of what should be in it and why. The one that Fedora ships is not up to par with the DVD that is shipped :( There are many things that are removed and you have the program but you can't do much with it :( KerTeX is a small distribution of TeX built from original sources by Donald E. Knuth. It lacks dvipdfm, pdftex, pdflatex and other goodies that many \TeX{}Nicians use, but it is portable works on several versions of *nix. amstex, latex, graphics, amslatex, and other packages are available to enhance basic TeX functionality. As for licensing, I believe that kerTeX is more relaxed and one can contact the author as for packaging. He has been very helpful in creating a SlackBuild since I also use Slackware. I have used Fedora for a while but I don't understand the rpmbuilding process :(, despite the many howto's, and for what? people* may not appreciate the effort for packaging it and complain about missing things. KerTeX does not depend on autoconf, gnu make or other utilities, but uses RISK the author of KerTeX calls it. It is portable and runs on *BSD variants and Linux. I have successfully installed it on Fedora, both i386, and x86_64, Slackware x86_64, Porteus Linux Live(successor to Slax LiveCD, I have modules available you can check porteus forum), and on FreeBSD 8.2 amd64, 8.3rc1, 9.0-RELEASE- FreeBSD amd64. KerTeX can coexist with other TeX Distributions :) It does not aim to be (THE ONE). It installs to /usr/local/bin/kertex, or /usr/bin/kertex depending on how you install it. I have on one machine TeTEX, TeXlive, and KerTEX and have scripts to call the one I need whenever I need it :) I don't like to depend on one tex distro only. I may need the other one or a special package and I have it at my disposal. For the licensing issues, I can contact the author and ask him for official word as to if the work is BSD Licensed or not, but BSD is more permissive than GPL. GPL is good, and even it cannot prevent from people taking away rights that are given by the original authors :( This is what is in the readme From the README in kerTeX's page: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4. Compiling, installing and upgrading. For motives linked to the licence, but also to clarify what is under the kerTeX licence and what is not (it was not very clear in the COPYRIGHTS, all the authors and the licences being cited at the beginning), the sources have been split in several chunks. To be short, I [TL] has forked Public Domain code and Public Domain programs that were officially orphaned by their original. To these are added my own organization of the whole, modifications and new code. These elements are the one in kertex_M and kertex_T. For the other elements that have very permissive licences but are, to my knowledge, still maintained by their authors, the sources have been put in dedicated chunks. This allows too more fine grained updating since kerTeX more frequently than the external sources. Note 1: these sources are reorganized for kerTeX and have been gathered from here and there. Note 2: for the NTS team: the etex.ch in the sources is not the one in the sources I have found since I had to adapt them for the new TeX version. I'd like someone to review. Thanks! It shall be noted that, concerning the licence, two things must be thought separately: the moral rights, that are inalienable: whether the code is in the P.D. or not, the author(s) stay(s) the author and his/their name(s) shall never be erased; secondly, there are the patrimonial rights (what can be done pratically with the code). I have made efforts to respect scrupulously this and to give credit when it was due. All the authors are cited. And if the cleaning of what had become a mess could give the original authors the incentive to have pleasure working back on their code, I will be more than happy ! What has to be done has been written done in: get_mk_install.sh (for Unices) get_mk_install.rc (for Plan9) Both scripts are downloadable on the kerTeX dedicated Web page. Whether run the script or read it, or both... http://www.kergis.com/en/kertex.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Probably not :( Since Fedora is very selective about its software and its methods of what is permitted. But it would a case of if users and/or developers are interested in packaging KerTeX, then a review should be underway? Otherwise users that are interested in trying out KerTeX, are welcome to and install it from the script. If they decide to do this on their own, I will be more than glad to help/advice them. I hope not to have offended anyone about this, but this is how I see things here with TeXLive on Fedora. I can post pages where other users will agree with me in case no one believes me. Regards, Antonio

--- On Wed, 3/14/12, Andras Simon <szajmi(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Yes, I got overyly excited about KerTEX, that I made these mistakes :( In this case, $ psd2pdf filename.ps will work by itself unless you want to give (output pdf) a new name $ ps2pdf filename.ps other-name.pdf Regards, Antonio