90b95357a618150232a94
[4] http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/trinkle/detex/
[5] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses
--
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD"
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
___
TeXLive mailing list
TeXL
Hello,
I just updated to Fedora 17 and installed the texlive 2012 distribution
from here[1].
I'd like to install the vim-latex package. However, making an attempt to
install it gives me dependency errors:
> Resolving Dependencies
> --> Running transaction check
> ---> Package vim-latex.noarch 0:
On Mon, 2012-04-16 at 08:26 +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> ... and fixed. It was caused by rpmbuild bug actually. It incorrectly
> parses Provides tag. Provides: tex(latex)= 2012 will cause two bogus
> provides "tex(latex)=" and "2012" to be added to the final RPM. I will
> try to fix this behaviour
Hi folks,
Since detex is already provided by the texlive repos, should I retire
the package[1] from Fedora?
> [root@ankur ~]# yum whatprovides '*/detex'
> detex-2.8-3.fc17.x86_64 : A program to remove TeX constructs from a text file
> Repo: fedora
> Matched from:
> Filename: /usr/bi
On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 23:26 +0200, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> Hi Ankur,
Hello Jindrich,
>
> On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 03:54:00PM +0530, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Since detex is already provided by the texlive repos, should I
> retire
> > the pack
On Thu, 2012-08-16 at 09:55 +0300, Jaron de Leeuw wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for your help.
>
> yum clean metadata did not work.
> I cannot even download the rpm with my browser:
> http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/texlive/2012/packages.fc17/tex-substr-1.2.svn16117-1.noarch.rpm
> I recieve a "connect
On Mon, 2012-08-20 at 17:26 -0500, umar wrote:
>
> This was requested before and there are a few source rpms at the
> website but I could not find the latest one. It would be nice to
> have the source rpm at the top level of 2012 for example.
>
> The reason is that I would like to update poppler
On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 13:56 +0100, Jan Kasprzak wrote:
> So apparently my system has not been properly upgraded using fedup,
> possibly because of the texlive.f17 dependencies. I still have lots
> of .fc17 packages:
>
> $ rpm -qa|grep -c \.fc17\.
> 1053
> $ rpm -qa|grep -c \.fc18\.
> 1698
Always
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 01:54 +, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> I tried to install some new texlive packages on a fully updated F20
> machine, and the scripts that run on installation keep failing.
> There's
> a sample below. After that, latex still can't find the package when I
> try to use it.
>
>
