← Back to team overview

ubuntu-manual team mailing list archive

Re: Upstream vs packaged texlive


Well the nice thing about all of this is, if you create the script for
the lubuntu manual, and the packaged version of texlive works for
compiling the ubuntu-manual, then it would be minor changes to make your
script work for ubuntu as well.

I have a script (if you search the archives) that runs through the
entire process also. The only things you have to do are download the
tex-live installer from their site and set up your SSH key and account
on launchpad.  If you want, I can send you the most recent version of
it, and you can tweak it to your needs also. The theory behind this is
that it might just be a case of changing the tex-live installation
portion of my script to meet your needs.

Of course on the flip side of that coin, your script might work better
than mine (even for people installing the upstream version). So, I'd be
interested in seeing your script as well.

In the interest of full disclosure, I do my writing for the Ubuntu
Manual on a Lubuntu desktop, and create my screenshots or whatever on my
laptop--which runs whatever version of ubuntu we're writing for. So, I
can tell you that the instructions on the site do work for Lubuntu users
as well as Ubuntu users.

Have a great day, and sorry for the long-winded reply. :)

On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 21:20 -0700, Jonathan Marsden wrote: 
> On 06/09/2013 08:53 PM, Kevin Godby wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Jonathan Marsden <jmarsden@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> But why?  What is the benefit, ...
> > Historical reasons, primarily.
> > Since we've always had problems with the Ubuntu/Debian packages in
> > the past, it's become easier to just recommend that everyone install
> > TeX Live from upstream so that they avoid those issues.
> OK... thanks for the explanation.
> I was hoping to recommend (at least to the Lubuntu folks) a new,
> streamlined, package-based way to get set up to do authoring/editing,
> using my script... and that installs packaged texlive.
> Q1. Is that OK with the existing team?
> Taking the idea one stage further:
> Q2. How do you feel about updating the instructions on the
> ubuntu-manual.org web site to use that new script, and so radically
> shortening/simplifying the instructions for getting involved?
> I'm willing to update the content there, but clearly that is a "bigger
> deal" than just what I/we tell Lubuntu folks on Lubuntu-related mailing
> lists etc. about how to get started.  Maybe this should be done later,
> say in a month or so, after a few Lubuntu folks have tried "my"
> approach, so we have some real world feedback on how well it works?
> > Incidentally, it looks like Debian sid has texlive packages that are
> > dated 2013. So hopefully Ubuntu will start receiving more regular
> > updates of texlive packages (i.e., new packages every six months
> > instead of getting behind by a year or more as it once was).
> Which should improve the comfort level of moving in the general
> direction of having newcomers to the Ubuntu Manual Project install
> texlive from packages.  Good :)
> I'm not primarily trying to make a philosophical point about packaged
> software, here.  I'm mainly trying to create a simple way for folks to
> join the efforts towards an Lubuntu Manual.  In particular, if it is
> package based and uses a script I wrote, I can almost certainly help
> them out quite a bit if their initial setup fails -- I don't want to
> create extra workload for the existing Ubuntu Manual team from newcomers
> just getting started authoring/editing for Lubuntu.
> 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

Follow ups