On 8/1/2012 10:18 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
It can be argued that emacs-auctex should not pull in texlive. Most users installing emacs-auctex will already have some flavor of tex in place, and not necessarily the cygwin one (like the OP, or perhaps a MikTex user). Plus, the error message is pretty intuitive and the solution very simple, if latex is not there: "latex: no such command" ==> "maybe I should install latex." Therefore, the expected aggregate
There's more to it than that. emacs-auctex installs stuff needed for its preview feature in /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/preview/. This won't be found by native texlive or by MikTeX.
frustration of users who installed auctex without latex available would likely be far lower than the aggregate frustration of users wanting to install auctex and getting saddled with an unwanted redundant texlive distribution (for which there is no easy solution).
Why is this so frustrating? It doesn't do any harm (except waste a small amount of disk space) to install Cygwin's texlive in parallel with native texlive. Just make sure the bin directory of the latter precedes /usr/bin in PATH. I myself have both installed, since I sometimes find it useful for testing purposes to be able to switch from one to the other (by temporarily changing PATH).
Ken -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
