--- On Thu, 3/29/12, Rex Dieter <rdie...@math.unl.edu> wrote:
> From: Rex Dieter <rdie...@math.unl.edu> > Subject: Re: in case you did not know about kerTeX distribution > To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Date: Thursday, March 29, 2012, 4:22 PM > Antonio Olivares wrote: > > > Since Fedora still uses texlive2007 on fedora[except > the ones using > > texlive-repos by J Novy > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/TeXLive ] > > > > The packaging and patents are issues that hold TeXLive > in Fedora back. > > KerTEX is BSD licensed and has no such issues. > In case it is important to clarify, I will try to do so this statement: ``The packaging and patents are issues that hold TeXLive in Fedora back'' If one installs Fedora 15 or Fedora 16 and you type # yum install texlive or another app that will pull it in, say kile, or texmaker, one will get TeXlive 2007, no 2010, no 2011 and one has to use the the repo to get a newer one. If you get the one from the repo, it is crippled. It does not have all the things that are needed to build books, you can hunt down style files and packages, or try to yum install them, but this is just much easier to get the TeXlive DVD and install it and be done with it. With the fedora version of TeXLive you can't be done with it :( This is what I try to state. There are apparently too many issues and patents and ..., holding it back :( ====================================================================== From: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/TeXLive Current status Targeted release: Fedora 17 Last updated: 2011-11-06 Percentage of completion: 60% It was moved from Fedora 14, to Fedora 15, to Fedora 16, and now to Fedora 17. When will it be there? Fedora 25? 60%, that is not working for many tex and latex users that need to typset beautiful documents :( Scope Requires packaging or testing and/or enhancements in fedora infrastructure, currently 1627 new packages are to be reviewed and added. Dependencies need to do a license audit - done automatically because upstream metadata contains codes for package licenses need mass review for all packages before this feature is completed - DONE import of all of the ~1600 packages need to be finished all of the packages need to be built Contingency Plan Stay stuck with TeX Live 2007. ====================================================================== If I want some real work done, I just install TeXLive from DVD and I am good to go. > To use a lightweight portable TeX distro, I find KerTeX to be very good. > Are you sure there are no issues? Issues with running the program(s)? Yes, a few bugs have been found and the author has done his best to patch them and release the fixes. Several fonts were not generated as not all fonts are present. When using dvips with the -G parameter this was causing some trouble. Issues with software licenses or patents? This is another thing and like I have mentioned, this is what holds (True TexLive Back from DVD). There are a great deal of many things removed because of the selective process of patents and ..., well you know the story :( Users just care about TeXing and LaTeXing documents, they need not worry about these things :( Who is going to sue? whom and why? One can't do much except simple TeXing and LaTeXing. One can do the same with KerTeX and it is smaller than the $ sed -i |limited|crippled|-insert-word-here| version of TeXLive that Fedora ships :( it is outdated texlive2007, and the texlive 2010, texlive 2011 never made its way into Fedora :( except for the repos by the texlive maintainer! Probably by Fedora 25 a genuine TeXLive could be in Fedora? but that is yet to be accomplished :( TeTeX was great for its time, but no one stepped up to the plate and continued the work by Thomas Esser. Now, since 2006 it has been depracated. Only TeXLive is available and people* make a big deal that it is too big, and they become selective of what should be in it and why. The one that Fedora ships is not up to par with the DVD that is shipped :( There are many things that are removed and you have the program but you can't do much with it :( KerTeX is a small distribution of TeX built from original sources by Donald E. Knuth. It lacks dvipdfm, pdftex, pdflatex and other goodies that many \TeX{}Nicians use, but it is portable works on several versions of *nix. amstex, latex, graphics, amslatex, and other packages are available to enhance basic TeX functionality. As for licensing, I believe that kerTeX is more relaxed and one can contact the author as for packaging. He has been very helpful in creating a SlackBuild since I also use Slackware. I have used Fedora for a while but I don't understand the rpmbuilding process :(, despite the many howto's, and for what? people* may not appreciate the effort for packaging it and complain about missing things. KerTeX does not depend on autoconf, gnu make or other utilities, but uses RISK the author of KerTeX calls it. It is portable and runs on *BSD variants and Linux. I have successfully installed it on Fedora, both i386, and x86_64, Slackware x86_64, Porteus Linux Live(successor to Slax LiveCD, I have modules available you can check porteus forum), and on FreeBSD 8.2 amd64, 8.3rc1, 9.0-RELEASE- FreeBSD amd64. KerTeX can coexist with other TeX Distributions :) It does not aim to be (THE ONE). It installs to /usr/local/bin/kertex, or /usr/bin/kertex depending on how you install it. I have on one machine TeTEX, TeXlive, and KerTEX and have scripts to call the one I need whenever I need it :) I don't like to depend on one tex distro only. I may need the other one or a special package and I have it at my disposal. For the licensing issues, I can contact the author and ask him for official word as to if the work is BSD Licensed or not, but BSD is more permissive than GPL. GPL is good, and even it cannot prevent from people taking away rights that are given by the original authors :( This is what is in the readme From the README in kerTeX's page: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4. Compiling, installing and upgrading. For motives linked to the licence, but also to clarify what is under the kerTeX licence and what is not (it was not very clear in the COPYRIGHTS, all the authors and the licences being cited at the beginning), the sources have been split in several chunks. To be short, I [TL] has forked Public Domain code and Public Domain programs that were officially orphaned by their original. To these are added my own organization of the whole, modifications and new code. These elements are the one in kertex_M and kertex_T. For the other elements that have very permissive licences but are, to my knowledge, still maintained by their authors, the sources have been put in dedicated chunks. This allows too more fine grained updating since kerTeX more frequently than the external sources. Note 1: these sources are reorganized for kerTeX and have been gathered from here and there. Note 2: for the NTS team: the etex.ch in the sources is not the one in the sources I have found since I had to adapt them for the new TeX version. I'd like someone to review. Thanks! It shall be noted that, concerning the licence, two things must be thought separately: the moral rights, that are inalienable: whether the code is in the P.D. or not, the author(s) stay(s) the author and his/their name(s) shall never be erased; secondly, there are the patrimonial rights (what can be done pratically with the code). I have made efforts to respect scrupulously this and to give credit when it was due. All the authors are cited. And if the cleaning of what had become a mess could give the original authors the incentive to have pleasure working back on their code, I will be more than happy ! What has to be done has been written done in: get_mk_install.sh (for Unices) get_mk_install.rc (for Plan9) Both scripts are downloadable on the kerTeX dedicated Web page. Whether run the script or read it, or both... http://www.kergis.com/en/kertex.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Has someone done a > licensing review of > KerTEX like what's currently underway for TeXLive? > Probably not :( Since Fedora is very selective about its software and its methods of what is permitted. But it would a case of if users and/or developers are interested in packaging KerTeX, then a review should be underway? Otherwise users that are interested in trying out KerTeX, are welcome to and install it from the script. If they decide to do this on their own, I will be more than glad to help/advice them. I hope not to have offended anyone about this, but this is how I see things here with TeXLive on Fedora. I can post pages where other users will agree with me in case no one believes me. Regards, Antonio -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
