Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-10 Thread Frank Küster
Norbert Preining wrote: > On So, 09 Jan 2011, Norbert Preining wrote: >> > I think you can make yout patch cleaner >> > by replacing /var/lib/texmf with $TEXMFSYSVARDIR, >> > as this avoids new instances of hard-coded paths: >> >> And where is $TEXMFSYVARDIR defined? > > Umpf, yes, it is, sorry.

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-10 Thread Frank Küster
Norbert Preining wrote: > On Mo, 03 Jan 2011, Hilmar Preusse wrote: >> would be possible. We have a config file where things can be changed >> and it may happen that people expect this can be done. Well, it may - but it is written in (the TeX) policy that they should not. >> And yes: I don't s

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-08 Thread Norbert Preining
On So, 09 Jan 2011, Norbert Preining wrote: > > I think you can make yout patch cleaner > > by replacing /var/lib/texmf with $TEXMFSYSVARDIR, > > as this avoids new instances of hard-coded paths: > > And where is $TEXMFSYVARDIR defined? Umpf, yes, it is, sorry. Complicated the origin of all this

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-08 Thread Norbert Preining
On Di, 04 Jan 2011, Braun Gábor wrote: > I withdraw my proposal. > I don't think being able to move trees is worth opening up the worms. Yes. > I think you can make yout patch cleaner > by replacing /var/lib/texmf with $TEXMFSYSVARDIR, > as this avoids new instances of hard-coded paths: And wher

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-04 Thread Norbert Preining
On Mo, 03 Jan 2011, Hilmar Preusse wrote: > would be possible. We have a config file where things can be changed > and it may happen that people expect this can be done. > > And yes: I don't see either a good reason to do so. Then we should simply add a BIG FAT WARNING to the various texmf.d/ fi

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-04 Thread Braun Gábor
> To make it completely clear: Debian TeX Live does not support > moving of arbitrary trees by changing variables in texmf.cnf. > > If we allow that this will be a huge set of worms we open up. I withdraw my proposal. I don't think being able to move trees is worth opening up the worms. I think y

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-03 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 09:41:04AM +0100, Hilmar Preusse wrote: > Happy new year, > > > > Not good[TM]. I'll open a wishlist bug to have that changed. Should > > > be that hard to source /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf at the beginning of these > > > > Can you transplant the X hierarchy somewhere else? I su

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-03 Thread Hilmar Preusse
On 02.01.11 Norbert Preining (prein...@logic.at) wrote: > On Fr, 31 Dez 2010, Hilmar Preusse wrote: Happy new year, > > Not good[TM]. I'll open a wishlist bug to have that changed. Should > > be that hard to source /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf at the beginning of these > > Can you transplant the X hiera

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2011-01-01 Thread Norbert Preining
On Fr, 31 Dez 2010, Hilmar Preusse wrote: > > To make it completely clear: Debian TeX Live does not support > > moving of arbitrary trees by changing variables in texmf.cnf. > > > Not good[TM]. I'll open a wishlist bug to have that changed. Should > be that hard to source /etc/texmf/texmf.cnf at t

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2010-12-31 Thread Hilmar Preusse
On 30.12.10 Norbert Preining (prein...@logic.at) wrote: Hi, > Most of our scripts (the ones written for Debian) expect TEXMFDIST to > be /u/s/texmf-texlive and TEXMFSYSVAR to be /v/l/texmf. > > Looking through the whole trigger code I see many instances of that. > > To make it completely clear

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2010-12-30 Thread Norbert Preining
On Di, 28 Dez 2010, Hilmar Preusse wrote: > > AFAIK the paths texlive uses can be freely configured by the sysadmin. > > So I think the paths /var/lib/texmf/ etc in the examples are > > simplification to clearly state the idea and not meant to appear > > in real code. > > > > Therefore I suggest t

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2010-12-29 Thread Frank Küster
Hilmar Preusse wrote: >> Therefore I suggest to modify the proposed patch of ponstinst.in to >> obtain the path from the relevant configuration variable >> (which I guess is TEXMFSYSVAR as this seems to be the one used by >> updmap-sys). kpsewhich --expand-var='$TEXMFSYSVAR' > Could you care

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2010-12-28 Thread Hilmar Preusse
On 27.12.10 Braun Gábor (bra...@renyi.hu) wrote: Hi Norbert, > Package: tex-common > Followup-For: Bug #607857 > > AFAIK the paths texlive uses can be freely configured by the sysadmin. > So I think the paths /var/lib/texmf/ etc in the examples are > simplification to clearly state the idea and

Bug#607857: tex-common: Hard-coded path in proposed patch

2010-12-27 Thread Braun Gábor
Package: tex-common Followup-For: Bug #607857 AFAIK the paths texlive uses can be freely configured by the sysadmin. So I think the paths /var/lib/texmf/ etc in the examples are simplification to clearly state the idea and not meant to appear in real code. Therefore I suggest to modify the propos