ubuntu-manual team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: Upstream vs packaged texlive
I suppose that the advantage of the packaged version is that it gets
updated (if there is an updated version) at least every time you update to
a new Ubuntu version and possibly in between Ubuntu versions. I installed
texlive for the precise manual, using the instructions on the website, and
I have no idea how to update it, if it does needs updating.
On 9 June 2013 22:48, Patrick Dickey <pdickeybeta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm sure Kevin or Hannie will reply to this also, but here's my .02
> worth. Awhile back, the packaged version was limited and behind
> compared to the upstream version. Plus we also make in different
> languages, so I'm not sure how well the packaged version fares with
> Whether that's still the case or not, I'm not sure. I think the most
> recent attempt at using the packaged version (before your attempts now)
> was in Oneric or Precise, and it still had issues. I would say that if
> the packaged version works as well as the upstream version, then people
> can use it (especially those who are bandwidth limited). Otherwise you
> should stick with the upstream one. After the initial installation, the
> upstream one shouldn't require a lot of bandwidth to keep updated.
> And I would say that unless you're doing a clean install of Ubuntu, if
> you already have the upstream one installed, stick with it. No sense in
> removing something that works to replace it with the packaged version of
> the same thing (which works too).
> Have a great day.:)
> On Sat, 2013-06-08 at 20:54 -0700, Jonathan Marsden wrote:
> > My (very limited!) experience is that using Raring-packaged texlive
> > works, for a definition of "works" that just means it creates an English
> > language PDF file that is viewable in evince and which "looks right"
> > when so viewed for a minute or two.
> > Why does the Ubuntu Manual team currently recommend using unpackaged
> > texlive instead? Are there tests for the build system that fail when
> > using Raring-packaged texlive but succeed when using the unpackaged
> > Is there a better test suite than "run make and see if the resulting PDF
> > looks OK", which I should be using?
> > Thanks,
> > Jonathan
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual
> > Post to : ubuntu-manual@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual
> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual
> Post to : ubuntu-manual@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-manual
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp