On 2024/11/21 19:10, Kirill A. Korinsky wrote: > On Mon, 11 Nov 2024 22:33:15 +0100, > Edd Barrett <e...@theunixzoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > > Here's the update to TeX Live 2024. > > > > Notes: > > > > - ConTeXt is unbroken this time. Requires the luametatex update I just > > posted. > > > > - I disabled dvisvgm because it's build system is broken and can't be > > persuaded to unbundle its deps. Shout if you use this program. We can > > port > > it separately if need be. > > https://tug.org/pipermail/tldistro/2024q2/000477.html > > > > - Tested with a partial bulk on anything that {LIB,BUILD}_DEPENDS on TL. > > All > > OK on amd64. Can anyone try on big endian? > > > > Please have a play and let me know how you get on. > > > > Diff attached, because it's >33K lines :) > > > > Thanks for update! Just tested locally. > > Slava Voronzoff had asked to confirm, via telegram group, that some > texlive_texmf port tries to remvoe /usr/local/bin. > > I'd like to confirm that removing texlive_texmf-minimal-2024 leads to > > Error deleting directory /usr/local/bin: Directory not empty
There are bogus "bin/" entries in a couple of PLISTs. Also I'm not 100% sure but I think the "updating" of @conflict markers goes too far - these really only want to be listed when there are actual conflicts (in some cases, e.g. share/texmf-dist/tex/latex/etoolbox, share/texmf-dist/tex/latex/everyshi, share/texmf-dist/tex/latex/xpatch, bin/eptex, they are needed). Problem with over-listing @conflicts is that pkg_add has to merge the updates together - and if there's one set of ports in the tree where this is a problem (for disk use on updates) that's texlive.
