[Gnumed-devel] Re: pdflatex and dependencies was Re: [Gnumed-bugs] <bug>: Trying to print the basic medication form

[Karsten Hilbert]

On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 09:58:13AM -0800, Jim Busser wrote:

> >> (presumably from the package texlive-base-bin;
> > 
> > apt-cache search pdflatex:
> > 
> >     fragmaster - use of psfrag constructs with pdflatex
> >     latex-beamer - LaTeX class to produce presentations
> >     texlive-latex-extra - TeX Live: LaTeX supplementary packages
> >     ctioga - Befehlszeilen-Plot-Werkzeug
> >     pdfjam - Sammlung von Verarbeitungswerkzeugen für PDF-Dokumente
> >     pgf - TeX Portables Grafik-Format
> >     purifyeps - erstellt EPS-Dateien zur Benutzung in TeX und pdfTeX
> > 
> > So, rather texlive-latex-extra (I wouldn't have guessed that either).
> 
> I think the above is wrong:
> 

> 1) the apt-cache command allows you to search through both
> descriptions and package names... the listing is no
> guarantee of which package provides a certain binary

While certainly true that was the most likely candidate from
the above list. However, the magic incantation should've
been:

which pdflatex:

        /usr/bin/pdflatex

ls -al /usr/bin/pdflatex:

        lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 6 15. Mai 2009  /usr/bin/pdflatex -> pdftex

apt-file search /usr/bin/pdftex:

        texinfo: /usr/bin/pdftexi2dvi
        texlive-base-bin: /usr/bin/pdftex

> 2) the command pdflatex exists in my system, despite my not having 
> texlive-latex-extra installed

Your are correct.

> 3) my difficulty locating the source package for the pdflatex "binary" 
> (command) may be explained by pdflatex not being a binary in its own right 
> but rather a virtual (?) binary...

On Debian all this is taken care of.

> It seems that only
> 
>       texlive-base-bin
> 
> is the dependency

Correct.

> (which already appears in my desktop install of Lenny
> unless some additional package caused it to be installed).
> That is, *unless* we identify that gnumed 0.6 (medication
> list printing) won't work without *also* depending on
> 
>       texlive-latex-extra

I am not yet sure about that, probably not.

> but do you *actually* have this installed, or is it just appearing in your 
> apt-cache?

I do have it installed.


> when I do
> 
>       pdflatex --version
> 
> I get the same output as did you did on all lines but the last three:
> 
> > Compiled with libpng 1.2.40; using libpng 1.2.41
> > Compiled with zlib 1.2.3.3; using zlib 1.2.3.3
> > Compiled with libpoppler version 0.12.0
> 
> I get
> 
>       Compiled with libpng 1.2.27; using libpng 1.2.27
>       Compiled with zlib 1.2.3.3; using zlib 1.2.3.3
>       Compiled with libpoppler version 3.00
> 
> presumably because my VM is Lenny (stable), with gnumed
> and some python dependencies from testing but I am not sure
> the minor upgrades would have anything to do with
> anything…

No they don't. Most definitely not with anything we are
currently concerned with.

> So Karsten if you did in fact already install
> 
>       texlive-latex-extra
> 
> I can try installing it, too and try again (though it might be nice to be 
> isolate why we depend on it).
> 
> If that is not the solution, will an apt-get uninstall and apt-get (re) 
> install of
> 
>       texlive-base-bin
> 
> cause its components to get recompiled, or will I need some other method to 
> recompile pdflatex?

I don't think that has anything to do with the problem. The
current CVS holds a corrected .tex template which will
require a re-bootstrapped database (also from CVS) which
will then work (at least it did for Sebastian for whom it
didn't before.

The problem was with CVS replacing \$ as $ which in LaTeX
has a meaning (namely starting Math Mode).

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346