s/type1/paratype/ptsans/PTC55F.pfb
> from install of texlive-paratype-2010-4.svn23607.fc15.noarch conflicts
> with file from package
> texlive-ptsans-2010-3.2.003.svn21693.fc15.noarch
I got this too. Looks like texlive-paratype should Obsoletes:
texlive-ptsans and texlive-ptserif.
-
age states that the inclusion process is 60% complete.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
___
TeXLive mailing list
TeXLive@linux.cz
http://www.linux.cz/mailman/listinfo/texlive
Hi,
epstopdf is broken.
$ rpm -q texlive-epstopdf-bin
texlive-epstopdf-bin-2010-7.20111008_r24240.svn18336.fc16.noarch
$ file /usr/bin/epstopdf
/usr/bin/epstopdf: broken symbolic link to
`../share/texlive/../texmf-dist/scripts/epstopdf/epstopdf.pl'
The second .. is too much.
--
Jussi Le
Hi,
I'm getting an awful lot of HTTP 404 errors when trying to update
TeXLive on my F16 laptop. The yum metadata is up to date on the laptop,
so the mirror must be out of sync.
PS. How is the legal audit proceeding? Any chance of TeXLive 2011
becoming part of Fedora 17?
--
Jussi Lehtola
F
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:37:11 +0100
Jindrich Novy wrote:
> Hi Jussi,
>
> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 09:48:42AM +0200, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > I'm getting an awful lot of HTTP 404 errors when trying to update
> > TeXLive on my F16 l
recommend you
> try again to install the real TeXLive, which is a well-tested, stable
> and reliable distribution. Read the documentation at
You're saying that installing a TeX distribution by hand is easy for
novices? :D
I've been using Jindrich's packages for a long time n
ems with the TL2011 packages, since
the packaging system has matured. I'd definitely recommend using the
TL2011 packages, by installing
http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/texlive/2011/packages.fc15/texlive-release-2011-5.20120115_r25109.fc15.noarch.rpm
TL2012 is currently a bad option for production, rega
live.
>
> I believe this problem is possibly not generalized because no one
> else have reported it
I have the same problem as well on a clean Fedora 17 install.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.org
___
895.noarch (texlive)
Requires: texlive-famt-doc
You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedoraproject.
gt; Fedora (one for binaries, the other for CTAN noarch builds). Also it
> would be much easier to maintain it/syncing it with upstream.
So couldn't you just ask for an exception from the policy? Until the
font macros are fixed that is.
--
Jussi Le
other legacy font issues. He is
blisfully unaware of anything except packaging of fonts (all owned
pacakges are fonts and all reviews performed are on fonts). This kind
of dedication is good for Fedora, but sometimes the limited point of
view causes unnecessary problems.
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedo
On Sat, 1 Sep 2012 20:20:32 +0200
Jindrich Novy wrote:
> Hi Jussi,
>
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 01:57:48PM +0300, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> > > In case there wouldn't be such restriction for fonts we would need
> > > just 2 packages to be reviewed/imported to have Te
Hi,
am I correct in assuming that the non-monolithic build of TeXLive 2012
has finally hit rawhide?
I'm wondering, though, why the tex- prefixed packages in Jindrich's
repo are prefixed with texlive- in rawhide...
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussileht...@fedorap
13 matches
Mail list logo
