[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnumed-devel] Re: pdflatex and dependencies was Re: [Gnumed-bugs] <bug>
From: |
Karsten Hilbert |
Subject: |
[Gnumed-devel] Re: pdflatex and dependencies was Re: [Gnumed-bugs] <bug>: Trying to print the basic medication form |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:25:48 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
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