[MacPorts] #47972: LaTeXML: texlive-related improvements

[MacPorts]

#47972: LaTeXML: texlive-related improvements
--------------------------+----------------------------
  Reporter:  mojca@…      |      Owner:  bruce.miller@…
      Type:  enhancement  |     Status:  new
  Priority:  Normal       |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports        |    Version:
Resolution:               |   Keywords:
      Port:  LaTeXML      |
--------------------------+----------------------------

Comment (by bruce.miller@…):

 Replying to [comment:2 mojca@…]:
 > Replying to [comment:1 bruce.miller@…]:
 > > I would guess "texlive-latex" is sufficient.
 >
 > I would try to go for `texlive-basic` if that's feasible. At least
 `mktexlsr` is part of that package.

 I think texlive-basic is too low; you'd really want latex or not bother
 installing tex at all.

 > I added Dan to CC. Dan, in case you are reading this: would it be
 possible (feasible) to put `mktexlsr` in some even more "standalone"
 package? It's just a shell script that requires `texmf.cnf`, hardly
 anything more advanced than that.

 Not really useful: without some form of tex to look for files, you really
 don't need mktexlsr to index them!

 > > > * one might want to disable calling `mktexlsr` during `make install`
 > >
 > > Could be; Is it better to run from "make" or from "post-activate"?
 >
 > It's not sufficient to run it from `make` (not to say useless: because
 the file isn't in place at the time when `make` is called – at that time
 it's still in `destroot`). The command is needed both in `post-activate`
 as well as in `post-deactivate` because that's the step when you add or
 remove the file to/from the TeX tree

 DOH! Yes, of course; the installation is staged (same for linux rpms).

 The mktexlsr in the Makefile is coded to be innocent, if noisy, so it
 really shouldn't cause a problem.
 I'm adding another switch to disable mktexlsr to be used in staged
 installation, like MacPorts & rpm.
 But it won't make it into CPAN until the next release.  Is this problem
 maybe ignorable for now?

 > (I don't know what happens if you ask for `texlive.mktexlsr` in a `post-
 activate` step on the buildbot. Maybe we should test and file a bug report
 if it fails ;)

 Is `texlive.mktexlsr` intended to be a safe way replacement for `system
 "mktexlsr"`? If so, it seems the right thing do use.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/47972#comment:3>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for OS X