Hi,
Emmanuel Beffara <m...@beffara.org> writes:
> Hello,
>
> De Maxim Cournoyer le 14/10/2023 à 18:06:
>> > I tried to explore this but I see no reason why the ls-R files would be
>> > ignored and I don't know how to explore this further. I do want to
>> > contribute
>> > to a solution, because right now texlive is practically unusable in Guix.
>>
>> Have you tried tracing execution with strace? Maybe try 'strace -e
>> file -f -s800 $texlive-cmd' and confirm whether the ls-R file gets used;
>> if it does, you could then introspect said file to see if it provides
>> what is being looked up or not.
>
> I did try strace, that is how I observed that apparently all installed files
> are stated (with newfstatat) several times in each compilation.
>
> The ls-R file is actually read:
>
> $ grep /ls-R log
> 28308
> access("/run/current-system/profile/share/texmf-dist/../texmf-dist/ls-R",
> R_OK) = 0
> 28308 newfstatat(AT_FDCWD,
> "/run/current-system/profile/share/texmf-dist/../texmf-dist/ls-R",
> {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=4053996, ...}, 0) = 0
> 28308 openat(AT_FDCWD,
> "/run/current-system/profile/share/texmf-dist/../texmf-dist/ls-R",
> O_RDONLY) = 3
>
> but aparently its contents are not taken into account.
My next question would be; how is this ls-R file produced in Guix?
Does it matches the expectations of upstream for producing such file?
If it does, it seems like we have some interesting topic (i.e. bug) to
engage with upstream for a resolution.
--
Thanks,
Maxim
