Hello, What about these 2 new stubs: stubs/unix/texmfstart: #!/bin/sh script=$(dirname $0)/../../ruby/texmfstart.rb exec $script "$@" # (or exec ruby $script "$@") stubs/unix/texsync: #!/bin/sh texmfstart texsync.rb "$@" # (Or is texsync now obsolete and replaced by another script?) Cheers, Peter -- http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/
On Jan 15, 2008 12:17 AM, Peter Münster wrote:
Hello,
What about these 2 new stubs:
stubs/unix/texmfstart:
#!/bin/sh script=$(dirname $0)/../../ruby/texmfstart.rb exec $script "$@" # (or exec ruby $script "$@")
texmfstart is usually "copy texmfstart.rb to texmfstart in bin and make it executable". The drawback is that if something changes, it needs to be updated in the bin folder as well. tetex had an interesting way to call texexec though. (I have never tried to understand it, but when texexec.pl has been updated, the latest verision has been taken without the need to update binaries.) Isn't this a bit dangerous if scripts move around? script=$(dirname $0)/../../ruby/texmfstart.rb
stubs/unix/texsync:
#!/bin/sh texmfstart texsync.rb "$@" # (Or is texsync now obsolete and replaced by another script?)
Something rsync-ish might pop up ... Mojca (In case that you figure out some more details about "context" stub, please let me know ... I didn't manage to make it work either. It seemed as if luatex didn't manage to find mtx-context.)
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:43:35AM +0100, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
texmfstart is usually "copy texmfstart.rb to texmfstart in bin and make it executable". The drawback is that if something changes, it needs to be updated in the bin folder as well.
Hello Mojca, that's why a stub is useful.
Isn't this a bit dangerous if scripts move around? script=$(dirname $0)/../../ruby/texmfstart.rb
Indeed, it works only, if you don't move it... My idea was ---to simplify my installation script--- only to add execution bits to .../stubs/unix/* and add .../stubs/unix to the PATH. But texmfstart seems to be an exception, I'll just keep my symbolic link.
(In case that you figure out some more details about "context" stub, please let me know ... I didn't manage to make it work either. It seemed as if luatex didn't manage to find mtx-context.)
It works for me, if I put .../scripts/context/lua/context into my PATH and add the --run option to the mtxrun call. And $@ should be "$@" of course. (This stub is fine, because it means "context file" = the future and "texexec file" = the past.) Cheers, Peter -- http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/
Peter Münster wrote:
But texmfstart seems to be an exception, I'll just keep my symbolic link.
sounds ok to me ... texmfstart, mtxrun, luatools : copies or symlinks the res: stubs (btw, for mtxrun related scripts, this is quite efficient because mtxrun already loads the file databases and the loaded scripts (like mtx-context) fon't need a restart; this (plus the lua factor) is why they run much faster than their ruby counterparts) Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:43:17AM +0100, Hans Hagen wrote:
But texmfstart seems to be an exception, I'll just keep my symbolic link.
sounds ok to me ...
texmfstart, mtxrun, luatools : copies or symlinks
the res: stubs
What about mtxrun and luatools, they are stubs today. Will that change? Peter -- http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/
Peter Münster wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:43:17AM +0100, Hans Hagen wrote:
But texmfstart seems to be an exception, I'll just keep my symbolic link. sounds ok to me ...
texmfstart, mtxrun, luatools : copies or symlinks
the res: stubs
What about mtxrun and luatools, they are stubs today. Will that change? Peter
this is mostly up to distributions ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:54:43AM +0100, Hans Hagen wrote:
What about mtxrun and luatools, they are stubs today. Will that change? Peter
this is mostly up to distributions
From now on I use your stubs in my simplistic texlive-package, that is getting even simpler today: chmod +x .../stubs/unix/* PATH=.../stubs/unix:$PATH ln -s .../scripts/context/ruby/texmfstart.rb .../TeX-live/bin/texmfstart
So, thank you for your stubs! Now I'm only waiting for the "context"-stub: #!/bin/sh mtxrun --script context --run "$@" Cheers, Peter -- http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Jan 15, 2008 12:17 AM, Peter Münster wrote:
Hello,
What about these 2 new stubs:
stubs/unix/texmfstart:
#!/bin/sh script=$(dirname $0)/../../ruby/texmfstart.rb exec $script "$@" # (or exec ruby $script "$@")
texmfstart is usually "copy texmfstart.rb to texmfstart in bin and make it executable". The drawback is that if something changes, it needs to be updated in the bin folder as well.
it's faster to have texmfstart as copy (on unix), on windows one can associate the suffix 'rb' with ruby and add the scripts path to %path%
(In case that you figure out some more details about "context" stub, please let me know ... I didn't manage to make it work either. It seemed as if luatex didn't manage to find mtx-context.)
this is fixed so you you need to mtxrun --selfupdate (luatools --selfupdate also works; the selfupdating is easier than copying) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
participants (3)
-
Hans Hagen -
Mojca Miklavec -
Peter Münster