[SOLVED] Call for testers: texlive-custom

shoshia · 07-10-2016, 04:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rworkman

No, /usr/local is for non-packaged software.

On Debian for example it is in /usr/local/share/texmf. That is convenient, when
you upgrade system

. texlive ppl also suggests to install new fonts in localtexmf tree(not $HOME/texmf).
But it is ok..

. Experienced user can do that and newbie will not need this at all

.
Thanks for your packages.

Quote:

Originally Posted by franzen;

Xindy is supported by my build, the texlive-extra package may be also needed to have full functionality.

Thanks, everything works fine and thank you for your work

sombragris · 07-12-2016, 03:49 PM

I'm downloading the updates now. franzen, could you set up a faster mirror, please? I can only get 20 kb/s maximum and that could be very frustrating when you're downloading near a gigabyte of data...

Didier Spaier · 07-12-2016, 04:15 PM

Johannes, as your project targets Slackware, maybe Darren will accept to mirror it on http://slackware.uk?

It never hurts to ask, anyway. The contact info is on top of the home page.

franzen · 07-12-2016, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sombragris

I'm downloading the updates now. franzen, could you set up a faster mirror, please? I can only get 20 kb/s maximum and that could be very frustrating when you're downloading near a gigabyte of data...

I have another(lowbudget) server which is hopefully faster, try

Code:

rsync -avP rsync://web2.0ur.de/slackbuilds/texlive/2016/ .

If that's not better i'll ask Darren, thanks Didier for the hint:-)

sombragris · 07-12-2016, 07:08 PM

franzen, I still have problems. The biber version you packaged is 2.4, which is not compatible with the biblatex version you packaged, which according to the documentation is 3.4, and requires a minimum biber version of 2.5.

When running pdflatex on a testing document, it turns out that version 2.7 is required, according to this log message:

Code:

Package biblatex Warning: File 'testing.bbl' is wrong format version - expected 2.7.

However, the bbl file's current format is 2.6, which is the reason I think biblatex requires the newer biber version.

Thanks again for all your help.

franzen · 07-13-2016, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sombragris

franzen, I still have problems. The biber version you packaged is 2.4, which is not compatible with the biblatex version you packaged, which according to the documentation is 3.4, and requires a minimum biber version of 2.5.

Attached is a biber testdocument which works here with biber 2.4., compiled this way

Code:

pdflatex biblatex-biber
biber biblatex-biber
pdflatex biblatex-biber

Quote:

When running pdflatex on a testing document, it turns out that version 2.7 is required, according to this log message:

Code:

Package biblatex Warning: File 'testing.bbl' is wrong format version - expected 2.7.

However, the bbl file's current format is 2.6, which is the reason I think biblatex requires the newer biber version.

Did you delete *.bbl, *.bcf and *.blg before compiling?
Could you please upload a (minimal)example-document which doesn't work?

If biber 2.5. works better without introducing other problems i'll add it of corse.
You may try it, download it (current is biber 2.5), tar vxf biber-linux_x86_64.tar.gz and put the biber-binary in /usr/bin/ (this overwrites biber 2.4).

franzen · 07-14-2016, 03:07 AM

I've noticed that the biber binary is also provided by the texlive netarchives,
and therefore hopefully plays nice together with biblatex from the same place.
So i took this biber(which is indeed version 2.5) for the just uploaded build6.

sombragris · 07-14-2016, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franzen

Attached is a biber testdocument which works here with biber 2.4., compiled this way

Code:

pdflatex biblatex-biber
biber biblatex-biber
pdflatex biblatex-biber

Hi Franzen. This example would not work because you did not provide the relevant *.bib file.

Quote:

Originally Posted by franzen

Did you delete *.bbl, *.bcf and *.blg before compiling?

Yes, I did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by franzen

Could you please upload a (minimal)example-document which doesn't work?

I had one but this is irrelevant now since build6 works like a charm. Thanks!!

sombragris · 07-14-2016, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franzen

I've noticed that the biber binary is also provided by the texlive netarchives,
and therefore hopefully plays nice together with biblatex from the same place.
So i took this biber(which is indeed version 2.5) for the just uploaded build6.

Hi franzen. I'm very happy to report that build6 now compiles my full thesis without a hitch. It should be noted that my thesis is a fairly complex document, with a long bibliography and a fairly extended system of cites and entries. So, THANK YOU!!! I'm very happy.

Again: You, sir, are Amazing!!

rworkman · 07-20-2016, 03:55 PM

and TeXLive 2016 is now at SBo. Thanks for your work on this, franzen - it is *greatly* appreciated!

gauchao · 07-21-2016, 11:06 AM

[Slackware 64 14.2]

Thank you for this great effort. However, when I try to download and build the packages (texlive, texlive-docs, texlive-extra and texlive-fonts) using SBOPkg I get an error when I download the texlive 20160523 source: MD5sums do not match. I saw a correction in the download link today but it is not working yet.

Thank you again!

PS: I can download and build the packages by myself with slackbuilds, but I have to upgrade 5 machines and sbopkg makes it easier for me.

willysr · 07-21-2016, 11:14 AM

please make sure you got the latest update since Robby make 3 quick public update

gauchao · 07-21-2016, 12:16 PM

It is not working yet, even after the sbopkg updates. Even when I try to manually download the sources for texlive 20160523 from ftp://tug.org/, md5sums mismatch. It is not critical and I can wait. Texlive is really huge! Thank you again.

sombragris · 07-21-2016, 12:19 PM

Ok, so now which packages are to be preferred? Franzen's or Robby's?

willysr · 07-21-2016, 05:10 PM

OK, robby fixed it on his branch