Re: tex-common: Please provide dh_installtex functions for packages that need only mktexlsr
Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:
> Hi Florent, hi all!
>
> On Mon, 23 Okt 2006, Florent Rougon wrote:
>> > Ok, this would be nice. And it could be implemented in the general case,
>> > no? If we do it in the right order maybe also the calls to mktexlsr in
>> > the other packages (with maps etc) only updated the right trees.
>>
>> Beware. First, this kind of optimization would bring very small gains in
>> my setup. Second, it's dangerous: if you only refresh ls-R files for
>> TEXMF trees where files are installed by the *latest* version of the
>> package, you'll miss the necessary refreshing of TEXMF trees containing
>> files from the *previous* version of the package. For instance, if the
>
> According to the TeX policy files should anyway *ONLY* installed into
> /usr/share/texmf, and we, ie teTeX and TeX live maintainers have to take
> care and know about the problems.
>
> And in MY setup it would bring a HUGE speedup, because building the ls-R
> DB for /usr/share/texmf-texlive takes quite long, even if nothing has
> changed and only files have been added to /usr/share/texmf...
>
> Maybe we should add a comment to the manpage that if you had old files
> in a *different* texmf tree you should add the OLD tree to the
> mktexlsr-ed ones via the command line...???
I think Florent has a point, but I also agree that texmf-texlive takes
long enough to be avoided if possible. What about adding TEXMFSYSVAR
and TEXMFSYSCONFIG unconditionally?
Note that we'd have to do some filtering to avoid duplicates:
# mktexlsr /etc/texmf /etc/texmf
mktexlsr: Updating /etc/texmf/ls-R...
mktexlsr: Updating /etc/texmf/ls-R...
mktexlsr: Done.
Regards, Frank
--
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Reply to: