Re: 2.99.8: updmap output directories
> > Ok, but please make sure that all links in texmf/doc/index.html and
> > texmf/doc/tetex/TETEXDOC.* work properly.
>
> Yes, I'll have to look at this anyway. Does the mkhtml script currently
> work?
texmf/doc/index.html is generated by texmf/doc/index.php (I run the php
script through a local apache+php). I think that mkhtml still works,
but it can only generate doc/helpindex.html not doc/index.html.
> managment system. If the user wants to use a more up-to-date texmf
> tarball, he can still unpack it in TEXMFLOCAL, but if he deletes any
Ok, I see.
> Which is exactly what I wanted (but see below). I assumed texconfig was
> a system-wide configuration tool, and on multi-user systems only root or
It can be used for both. In the default setup, TEXMFCONFIG and TEXMFVAR
point to a system-wide tree. But, users can just change these variables
(environment) and use texconfig / fmtutiul / updmap in their own tree.
That's why it is important to list TEXMFCONFIG and TEXMFVAR in the TEXMF
variable even though that causes some redundancy at fist.
> Ah, this is new to me. So you mean that now that texconfig respects
> TEXMFCONFIG,
Yes, and fmtutil / updmap respect TEXMFVAR for the files (formats /
map files) they generate.
> Is it also possible to create custom format files?
Yes.
> Anyway, it is a nice feature. I would only suggest that you clearly
> point out in the manpage and html documentation (didn't look at the
> latter yet) that this is meant for *user-specific* configuration in the
> default setup.
texconfig has no real documentation (the manpage is more or less
empty). Some of these issues are explained in TETEXDOC, however.
> But this also means that for our system-wide configuration which is
> connected to package management, we cannot rely on texconfig and
> TEXMFCONFIG and must work as if they didn't exist.
I don't understand this... texconfig can well be used to system-wide
configuration. Just set TEXMFCONFIG and TEXMFVAR to the right tree.
Thomas
Reply to: