I meant www.luatex.org, really. It drops that error when I try do download win32 release.

The binaries have been available there only very recently, so most people aren't yet aware of it.

Where luatex is located in PRAGMA? I see only cont-tfm.zip. I use TeXLive, so only luatex binaries I'm missing now.

In the minimal distribution (mswintex.zip for Windows, linuxtex.zip etc ...).

So the stand-alone mswincontext.zip will have everything I need to experiment with luatex (and XeTeX)?

Yes.

luigi scarso wrote:

On 8/8/07, Vyatcheslav Yatskovsky wrote:

...

Hello,

Installing MKIV as described in This Way magazine is somewhat tricky. But first of all, I cannot get LuaTEX! When I try to download win32 binaries from liatex.org, I get "404 Error - Bestand niet gevonden!"

maybe www.luatex.org

Hans is working on the site at the moment, so those links do not work yet. If you want the luatex binary only, go to http://foundry.supelec.fr/frs/?group_id=10

but see pragma site or mirror, it's better

but this is probably a better idea, since otherwise you have to update context separately. Best wishes, Taco

and wiki.contextgarden.net/Mark_IV

...

And just for curioisty, where such names as Mark II and Mark IV come from? ..from outer space ? http://wiki.contextgarden.net/images/0/0e/MKIV.avi

Vyatcheslav Yatskovsky schrieb:

Hello Taco,

I'm installing luatex according to 'This Way'. On the last step, when generating format files, I get the following:

C:\TeXLive2007\bin\win32>luatools --generate >log 'texluac' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file. 'luac' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file. 'texluac' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file. 'luac' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file.

I can provide any additional info.

i assume that you have installed the lua5.1 binaries and that they are in the $PATH. then simply remove the version number from the lua binaries. luac5.1.exe [TO] luac.exe etc. on other file systems you have symbolic links for this luac --> luac5.1 giving you the freedom to use several different versions in the same directory. if someone knows a better way on windows, please let me know. hth, peter

luac5.1.exe [TO] luac.exe etc.

Alternatively, you can use LuaTeX itself as the lua interpreter and compiler. That is, the same binary will act as: LuaTeX proper when called luatex(.exe) lua when called texlua(.exe) (equivalent to luatex --luaonly) luac, the compiler, when called texluac.(exe) So you don't even need lua anymore.

Peter Rolf wrote:

Arthur Reutenauer schrieb:

...

...

luac5.1.exe [TO] luac.exe etc. Alternatively, you can use LuaTeX itself as the lua interpreter and compiler. That is, the same binary will act as:

LuaTeX proper when called luatex(.exe) lua when called texlua(.exe) (equivalent to luatex --luaonly) luac, the compiler, when called texluac.(exe)

So you don't even need lua anymore.

i see. but on windows you waste more than 7mb disk space this way. installing the lua binaries costs only 288kb. so where is the benefit?

there must be a better way.

these 7 meg gave as advantage - no need to install anything else (no huge ruby/perl or whatever) - bytcode compiler in sync with luatex internals - texlua has the libs that we need built in alternatives: -- texlua.cmd -- @echo off setlocal set ownpath=%~dp0% "%ownpath%luatex" --luaonly %* endlocal and similar for texluac 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------

Peter Rolf wrote:

Hans Hagen schrieb:

...

...

Arthur Reutenauer schrieb:

...

...

luac5.1.exe [TO] luac.exe etc. Alternatively, you can use LuaTeX itself as the lua interpreter and compiler. That is, the same binary will act as:

LuaTeX proper when called luatex(.exe) lua when called texlua(.exe) (equivalent to luatex --luaonly) luac, the compiler, when called texluac.(exe)

So you don't even need lua anymore. i see. but on windows you waste more than 7mb disk space this way. installing the lua binaries costs only 288kb. so where is the benefit?

there must be a better way.

Peter Rolf wrote: these 7 meg gave as advantage

- no need to install anything else (no huge ruby/perl or whatever) - bytcode compiler in sync with luatex internals - texlua has the libs that we need built in

has to do with unix where the shebang line will only work with texlua since "luatex --luaonly" cannot be given, but there it's a symlink on windows one can copy and/or create an alias or use a small stub; future versions may have a core dll and three small binaries ... who knows 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------

Giuseppe Bilotta wrote:

Wednesday, August 8, 2007 Hans Hagen wrote:

...

has to do with unix where the shebang line will only work with texlua since "luatex --luaonly" cannot be given, but there it's a symlink

Actually, /usr/bin/luatex --luaonly could be used as shebang. It doesn't work on all systems, but it should work on most modern installations.

Yes, but #!/usr/bin/env luatex --luaonly is much less portable, and tex-related binaries are hardly ever in fixed locations. Best wishes, Taco

On 8/8/07, Peter Rolf wrote:

...

...

...

So you don't even need lua anymore. i see. but on windows you waste more than 7mb disk space this way. installing the lua binaries costs only 288kb. so where is the benefit?

- no need to install anything else (no huge ruby/perl or whatever) - bytcode compiler in sync with luatex internals - texlua has the libs that we need built in

it's just that i don't see the need for three identical files, when you can use one with different (mode switching) parameters. yes, i know. it's an early beta.

If you're concerned about the the 7 MB -- or in my case, not sure you'll remember to update all three files at once -- and you're on a machine with NTFS, you can create hard links. --Joel

Arthur Reutenauer wrote:

...

And just for curioisty, where such names as Mark II and Mark IV come from?

% engine=luatex language=uk \startcomponent mk-iitoiv \environment mk-environment \chapter{From \MKII\ to \MKIV} Sometime in 2005 the development of \LUATEX\ started, a further development of \PDFTEX\ and a precursor to \PDFTEX\ version~2. This \TEX\ variant will provide: \startitemize[packed] \item 21--32 bit internals plus a code cleanup \item flexible support for \OPENTYPE\ fonts \item an internal \UTF\ data flow \item the bidirectional typesetting of \ALEPH \item \LUA\ callbacks to the most relevant \TEX\ internals \item some extensions to \TEX\ (for instance math) \item an efficient way to communicate with \METAPOST \stopitemize In the tradition of \TEX\ this successor will be downward compatible in most essential parts and in the end, there is still \PDFTEX\ version~1 as fall back. In the mean time we have seen another unicode variant show up, \XETEX\ which is under active development, uses external libraries, provides access to the fonts on the operating system, etc. From the beginning, \CONTEXT\ always worked with all engines. This was achieved by conditional code blocks: depending on what engine was used, different code was put in the format and|/|or used at runtime. Users normally were unaware of this. Examples of engines are \ETEX, \ALEPH, and \XETEX. Because nowadays all engines provide the \ETEX\ features, in August 2006 we decided to consider those features to be present and drop providing the standard \TEX\ compatible variants. This is a small effort because all code that is sensitive for optimization already has \ETEX\ code branches for many years. However, with the arrival of \LUATEX, we need a more drastic approach. Quite some existing code can go away and will be replaced by different solutions. Where \TEX\ code ends up in the format file, along with its state, \LUA\ code will be initiated at run time, after a \LUA\ instance is started. \CONTEXT\ reserves its own instance of \LUA. Most of this will go unnoticed for the users because the user interface will not change. For developers however, we need to provide a mechanism to deal with these issues. This is why, for the first time in \CONTEXT's history we will officially use a kind of version tag. When we changed the low level interface from Dutch to English we jokingly talked of version~2. So, it makes sense to follow this lead. \startitemize[packed] \item \notabene {\CONTEXT\ \MKI}\quad At that moment we still had a low level Dutch interface, invisible for users but not for developers. \item \notabene {\CONTEXT\ \MKII}\quad We now have a low level English interface, which (as we indeed saw happen) triggers more development by users. \item \notabene {\CONTEXT\ \MKIV}\quad This is the next generation of \CONTEXT, with parts re||implemented. It's an at some points drastic system overhaul. \stopitemize Keep in mind that the functionality does not change, although in some places, for instance fonts, \MKIV\ may provide additional functionality. The reason why most users will not notice the difference (maybe apart from performance and convenience) is that at the user interface level nothing changes (most of it deals with typesetting, not with low level details). The hole in the numbering permits us to provide a \MKIII\ version as well. Once \XETEX\ is stable, we may use that slot for \XETEX\ specific implementations. As per August 2006 the banner is adapted to this distinction: \starttyping ... ver: 2006.09.06 22:46 MK II fmt: 2006.9.6 ... ... ver: 2006.09.06 22:47 MK IV fmt: 2006.9.6 ... \stoptyping This numbering system is reflected at the file level in such a way that we can keep developing the way we do, i.e.\ no files all over the place, in subdirectories, etc. Most of the system's core files are not affected, but some may be, like those dealing with fonts, input- and output encodings, file handling, etc. Those files may come with different suffixes: \startitemize \item \type {somefile.tex}: the main file, implementing the interface and common code \item \type {somefile.mkii}: mostly existing code, suitable for good old \TEX\ (\ETEX, \PDFTEX, \ALEPH). \item \type {somefile.mkiv}: code optimized for use with \LUATEX, which could follow completely different approaches \item \type {somefile.lua}: \LUA\ code, loaded at format generation time and|/|or runtime \stopitemize As said, some day \type {somefile.mkiii} code may show up. Which variant is loaded is determined automatically at format generation time as well as at run time. \stopcomponent ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------