freebsd-texlive port

Antonio Olivares olivares14031 at
Thu Oct 11 14:03:28 UTC 2012

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Jamie Paul Griffin <jamie at> wrote:
> [ Antonio Olivares wrote on Thu 11.Oct'12 at  6:39:00 -0500 ]
>> The efforts by Romain Tartiere should not go unnoticed.  For many
>> years now, he has a port to texlive:
>> It works with the FreeBSD tools that you mention and it updates the
>> packages using the FreeBSD infrastructure.  It happens that many
>> people install texlive through the dvd and make several changes so
>> that the tetex binaries do not get called on.
>> I have the freebsd-texlive port installed and it works beautifully.  I
>> can typeset books which require it.  I also use KerTeX,
>>  which is smaller and also works great in its own right.   What is
>> kerTeX:
>> For many users kerTeX would do the job for many texing/latexing needs.
>>  However for bigger jobs, i.e, bigger books with many style files, &
>> bigger macros then texlive is needed.  TeTeX does work well for many
>> things, but it is *NOT MAINTAINED, NOT UPDATED* despite the efforts of
>> some people and packages like tikz don't work well *unless you can
>> patch things up in the tex structure to make them work*.
> Yes I agree. As well as Romain, Nikola Lecic has done a great deal of work with getting texlive made available for FreeBSD - I'm sure there are others as well.
> I recall a couple of years ago, completely removed support for FreeBSD which prompted, I believe, the projects that Romain and Nikola started. Thanks to Nikola, who I *think* is still involved with the texlive project and namely support for FreeBSD, this problem no longer exists and the texlive distribution now supports FreeBSD.
> KerTeX is something I've yet to try, but I'm extremely interested in what it has to offer. It's innovative and a remarkable amount of work and certainly worth using for those using TeX regularly. NetBSD, or rather pkgsrc, and Linux software packaging systems as I'm sure you know have broken it down into portions of the distribution which is a sensible approach as modest users of TeX will most likely use only a small percentage of the software that comes with texlive. Perhaps a similar approach could be implemented into the FreeBSD ports system.
> I do think moving away from tetex for good is needed now. With all the changes to FreeBSD going on, ports relying on a dead project like tetex seems wrong.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at"

If I am not mistaken one of the reasons that FreeBSD has not moved to
texlive is because of the documentation.  The documentation project
makes calls to generate handbook and change between different versions
sgml, to tex and then use pdflatex which is/was part of teteX.
Texlive has it also, but the job from within the FreeBSD developers
has not made changes to this.   KerTeX does not have pdftex or
pdflatex which TeTeX still does carry so moving to it would also mean
many changes.

Some people complain that Texlive port/ports are too big and that
teTeX was reasonable and event though a texlive-tetex port exists, but
I guess not to many developers are fond of texlive.

If you or anyone else is interested in kerTeX, I have a script that
automates the installation and most or if not all of the supplemantary
packages, i.e, addons that are available.   I have it on several of my
machines and I am happy to use it.

[olivares at grullahighschool ~]$ which_kertex

#              WARNING!!!  WARNING!!!  WARNING!!!
# 1) The path separator is now, everywhere, semicolon ';' and not
#	colon ':'.
# 2) The pkg stuff is now in /usr/local/share/kertex/pkg/. Run instead
of pkg_core:
# 	/bin/sh /usr/local/share/kertex/pkg/ install


Best Regards,


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list