Package: guix-patches;
Reported by: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 18:57:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Done: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
View this message in rfc822 format
From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System) To: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr> Subject: bug#65683: closed (Re: [bug#65683] [PATCH v2] doc: manual: Update TeX Live-related sections.) Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2023 11:16:02 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Your bug report #65683: [PATCH] doc: manual: Update TeX Live-related sections. which was filed against the guix-patches package, has been closed. The explanation is attached below, along with your original report. If you require more details, please reply to 65683 <at> debbugs.gnu.org. -- 65683: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=65683 GNU Bug Tracking System Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems
[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr> To: Andreas Enge <andreas <at> enge.fr> Cc: 65683-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: [bug#65683] [PATCH v2] doc: manual: Update TeX Live-related sections. Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2023 13:15:14 +0200Hello, Andreas Enge <andreas <at> enge.fr> writes: > I think you can go ahead, as the person who packaged all of Texlive you are > clearly most competent for writing the documentation. I have looked at it, > which makes for a second opinion, so I would not know what else to > wait for. I know that the contents are technically correct. I think I was waiting for some possible feedback about clarity, in particular from people less familiar with that part of the code. In any case, I pushed the documentation change with slight modifications, in particular in the manifest example. Thanks! Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr> To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org Cc: Andreas Enge <andreas <at> enge.fr> Subject: [PATCH] doc: manual: Update TeX Live-related sections. Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 20:56:15 +0200* doc/guix.texi (Invoking guix import): Mention "--recursive" option. (Using TeX and LaTeX): Improve documentation of modular TeX Live. Insist on the incompatibility with TEXLIVE package, and expound part about collections and schemes. Also fix the call to `tlmgr', which does not need to happen from a "guix shell" invocation. Co-authored-by: Andreas Enge <andreas <at> enge.fr> --- doc/guix.texi | 124 +++++++++++++++++++------------------------------- 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi index 04e5875925..e716e22efc 100644 --- a/doc/guix.texi +++ b/doc/guix.texi @@ -14165,6 +14165,16 @@ Invoking guix import guix import texlive fontspec @end example +Additional options include: + +@table @code +@item --recursive +@itemx -r +Traverse the dependency graph of the given upstream package recursively +and generate package expressions for all those packages that are not yet +in Guix. +@end table + @item json @cindex JSON, import Import package metadata from a local JSON file. Consider the following @@ -45862,47 +45872,44 @@ Using TeX and LaTeX Guix provides packages for the @TeX{}, @LaTeX{}, ConTeXt, LuaTeX, and related typesetting systems, taken from the @uref{https://www.tug.org/texlive/, @TeX{} Live distribution}. However, -because @TeX{} Live is so huge and because finding your way in this maze -is tricky, we thought that you, dear user, would welcome guidance on how -to deploy the relevant packages so you can compile your @TeX{} and -@LaTeX{} documents. +because @TeX{} Live is so huge and because finding one's way in this +maze is tricky, so this section provides some guidance on how to deploy +the relevant packages to compile @TeX{} and @LaTeX{} documents. -@TeX{} Live currently comes in two flavors in Guix: +@TeX{} Live currently comes in two mutually exclusive flavors in Guix: @itemize @item The ``monolithic'' @code{texlive} package: it comes with @emph{every -single @TeX{} Live package} (more than 7,000 of them), but it is huge -(more than 4 <at> tie{}GiB for a single package!). +single @TeX{} Live package} (they are more or less 4,200), but it is +huge (more than 4 <at> tie{}GiB for a single package!). @item -The ``modular'' @samp{texlive-} packages: you start off with -a combination of @TeX{} Live @dfn{collections} and -@dfn{schemes}---``meta-packages'' such as -@code{texlive-collection-fontsrecommended}, or -@code{texlive-collection-context}, that provide the set of packages -needed in this particular domain, schemes being the name for collections -of such collections. This grants you core functionality and the main -commands---@command{pdflatex}, @command{dvips}, @command{luatex}, -@command{mf}, etc. You can then complete your selection with additional -collections or individual packages that provide just the features you -need---@code{texlive-listings} for the @code{listings} package, -@code{texlive-beamer} for Beamer, @code{texlive-pgf} for PGF/TikZ, and -so on. +A ``modular'' @TeX{} Live distribution, in which you only install the +packages, always prefixed with @samp{texlive-}, you need. @end itemize -We recommend using the modular package set because it is much less -resource-hungry. To build your documents, you would use commands such -as: +So to insist, these two flavors cannot be combined. If in the modular +setting your document does not compile, the solution is not to add the +monolithic @code{texlive} package, but to add the set of missing +packages from the modular distribution. + +Building a coherent system that provides all the essential tools and, at +the same time, satisfies all of its internal dependencies can be +a difficult task. It is therefore recommended to start with sets of +packages, called @dfn{collections}, and @dfn{schemes}, the name for +collections of collections. The following command lists available +schemes and collections (@pxref{guix-search,, Invoking guix package}): @example -guix shell texlive-scheme-basic texlive-cm-super -- pdflatex doc.tex +guix search texlive-\(scheme\|collection\) | recsel -p name,description @end example -You can quickly end up with unreasonably long command lines though. The -solution is to instead write a manifest, for example like this one, -which would probably be a reasonable starting point for a French -@LaTeX{} user: +If needed, you may then complete your system with individual packages, +particularly when they belong to a large collection. + +For instance, the following manifest is a reasonable, yet frugal +starting point for a French @LaTeX{} user: @lisp (specifications->manifest @@ -45911,31 +45918,16 @@ Using TeX and LaTeX "texlive-scheme-basic" "texlive-collection-latexrecommended" "texlive-collection-fontsrecommended" - "texlive-babel-french" - ;; PGF/TikZ - "texlive-pgf" - ;; Additional font. "texlive-kpfonts")) @end lisp -You can then pass it to any command with the @option{-m} option: - -@example -guix shell -m manifest.scm -- pdflatex doc.tex -@end example - -@xref{Writing Manifests}, for more on manifests. In the future, we plan -to provide more collections and schemes. That will allow you to list -fewer packages. - -The main difficulty here is that using the modular package set forces -you to select precisely the packages that you need. You can use -@command{guix search}, but finding the right package can prove to be -tedious. When a package is missing, @command{pdflatex} and similar -commands fail with an obscure message along the lines of: +If you come across a document that does not compile in such a basic +setting, the main difficulty is finding the missing packages. In this +case, @command{pdflatex} and similar commands tend to fail with obscure +error messages along the lines of: @example doc.tex: File `tikz.sty' not found. @@ -45951,7 +45943,7 @@ Using TeX and LaTeX @end example How do you determine what the missing package is? In the first case, -you'll find the answer by running: +you will find the answer by running: @example $ guix search texlive tikz @@ -45961,11 +45953,11 @@ Using TeX and LaTeX @end example In the second case, @command{guix search} turns up nothing. Instead, -you can search the @TeX{} Live package database using the @command{tlmgr} -command: +you can search the @TeX{} Live package database using the +@command{tlmgr} command: @example -$ guix shell texlive-bin -- tlmgr info phvr7t +$ tlmgr info phvr7t tlmgr: cannot find package phvr7t, searching for other matches: Packages containing `phvr7t' in their title/description: @@ -45980,32 +45972,10 @@ Using TeX and LaTeX texmf-dist/tex4ht/ht-fonts/alias/adobe/helvetic/phvr7t.htf @end example -The file is available in the @TeX{} Live @code{helvetic} package, which is -known in Guix as @code{texlive-helvetic}. Quite a ride, but we found -it! - -There is one important limitation though: Guix currently provides a -subset of the @TeX{} Live packages. If you stumble upon a missing -package, you can try and import it (@pxref{Invoking guix import}): - -@example -guix import texlive @var{package} -@end example - -Additional options include: - -@table @code -@item --recursive -@itemx -r -Traverse the dependency graph of the given upstream package recursively -and generate package expressions for all those packages that are not yet -in Guix. -@end table - -@quotation Note -@TeX{} Live packaging is still very much work in progress, but you can -help! @xref{Contributing}, for more information. -@end quotation +@noindent +The file is available in the @TeX{} Live @code{helvetic} package, which +is known in Guix as @code{texlive-helvetic}. Quite a ride, but you +found it! @node Security Updates @chapter Security Updates base-commit: f5c4db45e95cf8ea23c2c133ed2535ca94a06f7d -- 2.41.0
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.