SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
At the time of this writing they still have version numbers matching the replaced package. Do they still work with the the new package? Are they affected by the CVE?
It appears that the new texlive-2023 package for Slackware64 15.0 does not include a significant number of resources which were present in the previous texlive-2021 package. Examples include bibliographic styles (such as harvard), a bunch of fonts and numerous LaTeX packages, among many others. Is this indicative of an upstream decision to remove a bunch of things from texlive that now must be supplied manually by the user, or has something gone amiss in the package preparation for Slackware64 15.0?
With so many components removed I imagine this will break a lot of existing documents.
It appears that the new texlive-2023 package for Slackware64 15.0 does not include a significant number of resources which were present in the previous texlive-2021 package. Examples include bibliographic styles (such as harvard), a bunch of fonts and numerous LaTeX packages, among many others. Is this indicative of an upstream decision to remove a bunch of things from texlive that now must be supplied manually by the user, or has something gone amiss in the package preparation for Slackware64 15.0?
With so many components removed I imagine this will break a lot of existing documents.
Thanks for the pointers. The one package which immediately sticks out to me personally is the harvard bibliographic style. I have a large number of documents which make use of this package which can no longer be compiled out of the box on Slackware 15.0. Two days ago they were fine. Harvard is a reasonably widely used bibliographic style, so it wouldn't surprise me if this affects quite a few people.
Slackware 15.0 is meant to be a stable distribution; users would not expect a security update to break LaTeX files which have worked up to now. I understand that there's a need to reign in the size of packages like texlive and that this will mean that some packages relied on by users will now need to be provided manually. While I'm a little annoyed to find that something I use is on the chopping block in Slackware-current, a line must be drawn in the sand somewhere I guess. However, making such a dramatic change in a supposedly *stable* Slackware version seems to go against everything that a stable distribution is meant to be.
I guess that Slackware 15.0's texlive-extra on SBo will include these removed packages when it is updated for texlive-2023, although in my use case I'll probably just manually grab the harvard style files that I require.
If the change *had* to be made to Slackware 15.0 at this point in its life cycle, a note in the ChangeLog to alert users to this change would have at least provided a clearly visible reason for why the security update has broken previously working LaTeX files. This could have included a suggestion to try SBo's texlive-extra package if previously installed LaTeX packages are found to be no longer available.
To summarise: I can certainly deal with the LaTeX packages I use which are now no longer included in Slackware. However, having these disappear during the lifetime of a stable Slackware branch (15.0) without any notification certainly seems to violate the principle of least surprise.
I'll probably just manually grab the harvard style files that I require.
Or you could stay with the original texlive-2021 if you don't need to run LuaTeX on untrusted files. (I wasn't even aware of the existence of LuaTeX. Only using pdfTeX.)
Thanks for the pointers. The one package which immediately sticks out to me personally is the harvard bibliographic style.
The next time the texmf-trees get build(this might be for the next release 2024 in the worst case), https://www.ctan.org/pkg/harvard will be there.
Quote:
Slackware 15.0 is meant to be a stable distribution; users would not expect a security update to break LaTeX files which have worked up to now. I understand that there's a need to reign in the size of packages like texlive and that this will mean that some packages relied on by users will now need to be provided manually. While I'm a little annoyed to find that something I use is on the chopping block in Slackware-current, a line must be drawn in the sand somewhere I guess. However, making such a dramatic change in a supposedly *stable* Slackware version seems to go against everything that a stable distribution is meant to be.
I just provided a fix for 2023, maybe there were issues patching texlive 2021, on the other hand 2021 has no upstream support anymore so it might be better to go forward, picking up dozens other(security?) fixes.
Last year after Slackware 15.0 was released, i made some major changes to the texlive packages(lots removed, some were added) to be shipped, that had to be done at some point, and that's more or less what has now landed in slackware 15.0.
Those major changes to the package-list probably won't happen again.
Quote:
I guess that Slackware 15.0's texlive-extra on SBo will include these removed packages when it is updated for texlive-2023
Yes.
Quote:
If the change *had* to be made to Slackware 15.0 at this point in its life cycle, a note in the ChangeLog to alert users to this change would have at least provided a clearly visible reason for why the security update has broken previously working LaTeX files. This could have included a suggestion to try SBo's texlive-extra package if previously installed LaTeX packages are found to be no longer available.
That would have been nice, but as the changes are one year old, it probably wasn't that obvious to write a warning.
The package description says
Quote:
texlive: SlackBuilds.org has more texmf files and documentation in the
texlive: texlive-extra and texlive-docs packages.
which is hopefully enough of a hint to get lost packages back.
After the upgrade to texlive 2023 I was bitten by the absence of esint. I didn't have a chance to test the updated texlive-extra though. Esint is one of the packages LyX treats as "core" (in the sense that it is on of those listed in the "Math Options" table). Considering that LyX is one of the most popular desktop apps using texlive, it might be a good idea to move esint to the core package.
For the next time, i added esint, and esint-type1.
wrapfig wasn't updated for 20 years, there is wrapfig2 as alternative.
For datetime(which depend on fmtcount(needed for something else?), so i didn't add this) there is datetime2 as alternative.
Are these alternatives ok, or are there issues?
wrapfig wasn't updated for 20 years, there is wrapfig2 as alternative.
For datetime(which depend on fmtcount(needed for something else?), so i didn't add this) there is datetime2 as alternative.
Are these alternatives ok, or are there issues?
Got an error message to move amsmath after wrapfig2, but it seems to work ok after that change.
datetime2 is more difficult for me. A long time ago, I made a new command with datetime, printing a date interval, e.g. \PrintDateInterval{1} prints 4.9.-8.9.2023 for the first week, \PrintDateInterval{2} prints the dates for the second week, and so on. I give a start date of a course in a separate file and weekly documents have dates calculated automatically every year. Doesn't work with datetime2. It is more productive for me to use the old datetime than to rewrite my code... But I don't think the idea of the Slackware texlive base package is to accommodate this kind of use.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.