Kees Zeelenberg wrote: > >1. increased document interoperability between architectures because both > >Linux and Mac use preferably TeX Live (MacTeX is redistribution of TeX Live > >if I read their pages right, CMIIW). > > Both MikTeX and TeXLive use the same sources, so there is no functional > difference.
See my second mail, where I tried to be more precise, my concern about differences was not about the source of packages. > They only differ in the GUI and the updating process, and in my > experience MikTeX is here much more mature and easy to use than TeXLive. In > fact, it would even be much better if LyX were to switch to MikTeX on Linux. I actually checked that on linux distros under my hands (most importnantly debian) before triggering this debate and it turned out that miktex was not by default in the repositories, so proper miktex install goes far beyond few clicks in various package installers... > Installation time is mainly so long because LyX installs each missing package > separately, and has to call the MikTeX package manager (mpm) each time. That was my impression as well. > But by using the ???install option, mpm can also install more than one > package, > either from a package list on the command line or from a list in a file, and > then works much faster. The whole process would then probably take only a few > minutes. See https://docs.miktex.org/manual/mpm.html for more details. Ah, that is nice. I can only ask why we didn't use that for last 10 years then. Pavel
