[arch-dev-public] texlive-bin binary doesn't match PKGBUILD

Firmicus Firmicus at gmx.net
Mon Oct 12 05:37:33 EDT 2009

Jan de Groot a écrit :
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 10:08 +0200, Firmicus wrote:
>> Jan de Groot wrote:
>>> Somehow the texlive-bin PKGBUILD doesn't provide the same binary package
>>> that is in the repository. I just committed a gnome-unstable directory
>>> with 3 patches that fixes build against poppler 0.12, but building it
>>> with makechrootpkg results in a lot of missing binaries. Also, I
>>> couldn't build texlive-bin without adding some force commands to ln and
>>> rm.
>> Thanks for reporting this Jan. I'll happily loot into this. But can you
>> send me some more details first?
>> Here are the facts from my side:
>> texlive-bin 2009.4-2 was indeed created with "makepkg -R" on the basis
>> of the previous build (pkgrel=1) because I only needed to add two
>> missing symlinks for texlua and texluac (see FS#16486) and did not feel
>> like rebuilding the whole goddam thing for something as simple as that
>> (ca. 30 minutes of compilation at full processor last costs a lot of
>> electricity you know ;) and my fans get real noisy too!)...
>> So yes, I did fix that by hand: I unpacked the previously built packages
>> under $pkgdir, created the symlinks, added the corresponding missing
>> lines in the PKGBUILD, and then repackaged. I can assure you that the
>> previous build (2009.4-1) was generated from the PKGBUILD then in trunk.
>> But it was NOT built with makechrootpkg. Sometimes (rarely) makechroot
>> is not a good idea. I know that building subversion and gvim with
>> makechroot can yield incorrect packages. In the particular case of
>> texlive-bin, which is very complex, I need to be in full control and a
>> chroot environment does not provide this condition. But I am open to
>> your criticism if you think this is not a good approach ;)
>> Yet I am nevertheless surprised that texlive-bin does not build well
>> with makechrootpkg. I certainly does in a normal environment.
> The fixes were minor. It took me several rebuilds to find this out, but
> here's a list:
> - The symlinks you created weren't in the PKGBUILD correctly, I added
> the correct ones, but didn't remove the wrong ones

> - The command that generates all the symlinks depends on texlive-bin
> being installed on the system, I fixed it by adding $pkgdir/usr/bin to
> Besides the two fixes, nothing special was done to the package.

OK, I have just examined your fixes with svn diff: thanks a lot!


More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list