here's how i did it (, if i remember correctly). get a a luatex binary and dump it into the dir of the last command $ . ~/context.distro/tex/setuptex ... $ which luatex does this work? svn cat http://svn.contextgarden.net/minimals/bin/tex/linux-64/current/luatex/bin/lu... >`which luatex` see; http://wiki.contextgarden.net/ConTeXt_Minimals#Reverting_to_an_older_install... I use ConTeXt - 2008.10.31 13:58 so in my case it's sh ./first-setup.sh --context=2008.10.31 you might want to look at the thread i started; http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.context/49826/focus=49831. good luck. On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 21:41 +0200, Mojca Miklavec wrote:

2009/6/3 Michal Kvasnička wrote:

...

Hallo, gentlemen.

I've just tried to install the latest stable ConTeXt minimals on my new system (SuSE Linux 11.1). The system downloaded itself (via rsync) all right, but it isn't able to create formats (MarkII; I don't know how to use MarkIV). If I try run texexec --make --all manually, I get this error: ...<TEXROOTDIR>/tex/texmf-linux-64/bin/mtxrun:8707: attempt to concatenate a nil value

It's counter-intuitive, but I'm afraid that "stable" might be a bi broken at the moment.

Hans has "recently" (for ConTeXt time scale that would be iron-age) replaced some ruby scripts by lua scripts (texmfstart by mtxrun) and now even mkii depends on luatex, but since we only provide a single luatex binary at the moment, it either breaks current or beta. I should have fixed that, but not now.

Possible solutions: 1.) just take the beta (easiest); most recent problems only affect mkiv users; there are almost no changes in mkii, so you should be on the safe side 2.) create a new texexec with "texmfstart texexec" instead of "mtxrun texexec" and make sure that it comes first in path 3.) fetch an older luatex; there should be one at something like http://minimals.contextgarden.net/current/bin/linux/luatex/beta-0.31.3/, but the one for linux-64 is missing for unknown reason (the plan is to fix it ...)

I didn't try any of the 2/3 options, I'm just blindly guessing.

Mojca ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 23:53, Maurí­cio wrote:

...

It's counter-intuitive, but I'm afraid that "stable" might be a bi broken at the moment.

I didn't find discussion on that on the list, so I think it is not bad to ask: has context considered these "new fashion" version control systems?

I've been using these for a few months (darcs and, recently, mercurial), and I can tell it's really worth, although I don't know if developers do have time to try or plan such kind of switch.

The very first plan was to make everything based on svn. The problem is that svn is still very very limited. I was experimenting with darcs, but didn't have enough knowledge about it, and darcs consumes twice the space needed if I remember correctly, so that was somehow ruled out before I even started thinking ... I wanted to have one special kind of functionality, namely, being able to choose which modules to install, which engines to install, which fonts to install etc. SVN doesn't offer that. Darcs does with some clever trickery, but see above. We did consider ... but didn't have the right idea about the exact inplementation. Also, I didn't expect so serious problems with version mismatches. ConTeXt will soon be available with all beta versions as a git repository, but we would have to put everything else into some repository as well. Mojca