[blfs-dev] docbook-utils : TeX ? Why ?

Bruce Dubbs bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Mon Aug 19 18:33:10 PDT 2013


Ken Moffat wrote:
>   I'm just reviewing my buildscripts for docbook/xml.  Got to
> docbook-utils and it now lists texlive as *required*.  My considered
> response is the same as my initial response : WTF ?

This is obviously wrong.  I'm going through a new build now and jsut did 
that two days ago, but didn't look at teh dependencies as I have a prior 
log that I use that gives a good order to build.  In any case, this is 
what I built:

Sat Aug 17 22:22:15 CDT 2013 /usr/src/sqlite/sqlite-autoconf-3071700.tar.gz
Sat Aug 17 22:29:47 CDT 2013 /usr/src/apr/apr-1.4.8.tar.bz2
Sat Aug 17 22:30:19 CDT 2013 /usr/src/apr-util/apr-util-1.5.2.tar.bz2
Sat Aug 17 22:31:42 CDT 2013 /usr/src/expat/expat-2.1.0.tar.gz
Sat Aug 17 22:36:38 CDT 2013 /usr/src/subversion/subversion-1.8.1.tar.bz2
Sat Aug 17 22:38:25 CDT 2013 /usr/src/libffi/libffi-3.0.13.tar.gz
Sat Aug 17 22:42:43 CDT 2013 /usr/src/python/Python-2.7.5.tar.xz
Sat Aug 17 22:46:45 CDT 2013 /usr/src/libxml2/libxml2-2.9.1.tar.gz
Sat Aug 17 22:49:50 CDT 2013 /usr/src/neon/neon-0.30.0.tar.gz
Sat Aug 17 22:51:24 CDT 2013 /usr/src/libxslt/libxslt-1.1.28.tar.gz
Sat Aug 17 22:52:48 CDT 2013 /usr/src/sgml/sgml-common-0.6.3.tgz
Sat Aug 17 22:54:20 CDT 2013 /usr/src/docbook31/docbk31.zip
Sat Aug 17 22:56:03 CDT 2013 /usr/src/docbook45/docbook-4.5.zip
Sat Aug 17 23:03:46 CDT 2013 /usr/src/docbook-xsl/docbook-xsl-1.78.1.tar.bz2
Sat Aug 17 23:14:40 CDT 2013 /usr/src/docbook-xml-45/docbook-xml-4.5.zip
Sat Aug 17 23:17:55 CDT 2013 /usr/src/xmlto/xmlto-0.0.25.tar.bz2
Sat Aug 17 23:20:42 CDT 2013 /usr/src/opensp/OpenSP-1.5.2.tar.gz
Sat Aug 17 23:23:17 CDT 2013 /usr/src/openjade/openjade-1.3.2.tar.gz
Sat Aug 17 23:25:16 CDT 2013 
/usr/src/docbook-dsssl/docbook-dsssl-1.79.tar.bz2
Sat Aug 17 23:27:02 CDT 2013 
/usr/src/docbook-utils/docbook-utils-0.6.14.tar.gz

>   The version (0.6.14) hasn't changed for more than 2 years, and it
> never used to require any variant of TeX.  So what changed ?

The archives show that I changed it about 10 months ago with the comment 
'Archive lprng and jadetex'.  Well, jadetex and openjade are not the 
same thing.  The requirement is openjsde.   I'll fix that at my next commit.

>   I've still got a couple of local versions of the book from 2012.
> In those the required deps were openjade (instead of texlive),
> docbook-dsssl and docbook-3.1.  Has this somehow got trashed during
> the TeX -> Texlive changes ?   But then I noticed that jadetex used
> to be an optional runtime dependency (with a note of what it was
> used for), and that is no longer listed.  Jadetex was moved to the
> archive in r10821, and as part of that texlive became required.
>
>   Is that just an oversight, and it should be listed as 'optional,
> needed for conversion to DVI, PS and PDF' ?

Yes, it's an oversight, but I'm not sure if texlive is needed or not. I 
think not.  My log has:

SGML_SEARCH_PATH=../..:../../doc:.. \
    jade -t sgml -i html -d ../../docbook-utils.dsl\#html \
       -V '%use-id-as-filename%' ../../doc/docbook-utils.sgml


>   As of April I built docbook-utils without any sort of (jade,)TeX and
> everything seemed to work for what I'm doing (building packages on a
> desktop).  As of LFS-7.2 it also worked fine for everything on my
> server, which is where I render my local copies of the books.  So
> why has this excrescence^W very large program become required ?
>
>   Docbook-utils is also tagged for 7.4, but texlive isn't, so I guess
> that confirms it isn't necessary.

Yes.

   -- Bruce






More information about the blfs-dev mailing list