GNU bug report logs - #40558
Modular TexLive "Insufficient extension fonts" and duplicate fonts

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org>

Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2020 16:16:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Merged with 53339

Done: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: elaexuotee <at> wilsonb.com
To: 40558 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#40558: (no subject)
Date: Sat, 09 May 2020 19:47:48 +0900

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
I encountered a similar issue while trying to package something with a texlive-union input. Tracking down the issue has killed way too many hours.

FWIW, the `working.tex' minimal example is also giving me similar problems:

    $ guix describe
    Generation 28    5月 07 2020 01:10:02   (current)
      guix bed695a
        repository URL: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git
        branch: master
        commit: bed695aa94cd85800ec2c6296fb2d13e7ac29133
    $ guix environment --pure -e '((@ (gnu packages tex) texlive-union) `(,(@ (gnu packages tex) texlive-amsfonts)))'
    $ pdflatex working
    ...
    ! Math formula deleted: Insufficient symbol fonts.
    \)  ->\relax \ifmmode \ifinner $
                                    \else \@badmath \fi \else \@badmath \fi
    l.4 Hello! \(y = x^2\)
    ...

With the patch to texlive-amsfonts the above typesets just fine; however, metafont ends up generating cmmi10.657pk and cmr10.657pk font files. Is this expected? Typsetting it from the texlive installation of my foreign distro doesn't call out to metafont at all.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]
This bug report was last modified 3 years and 98 days ago.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.