Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#78822 - [texlive-bin] missing /usr/share/texmf-dist/scripts/latexmk/latexmk.pl

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Mark (marcool) - Sunday, 18 June 2023, 15:11 GMT
Last edited by Antonio Rojas (arojas) - Sunday, 18 June 2023, 16:15 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Hi there,
It seems that some of the recent changes to the texlive-bin PKGBUILD, or possibly the shift from "texlive-core" to "texlive-basic" have made the previously included latexmk perl script disappear.

````
[root@t480 ~]# latexmk
bash: latexmk: command not found
[root@t480 ~]# pacman -Ql | rg '^texlive' | rg 'latexmk'
texlive-bin /usr/bin/latexmk
[root@t480 ~]# ls -l /usr/bin/latexmk
lrwxrwxrwx root root 46 B Sat Jun 17 01:29:09 2023  /usr/bin/latexmk ⇒ ../share/texmf-dist/scripts/latexmk/latexmk.pl
[root@t480 ~]# fd latexmk /usr/share/texmf-dist/scripts/
[root@t480 ~]#
````

Additional info:
* package version(s)
2023.66984-7
This task depends upon

Closed by  Antonio Rojas (arojas)
Sunday, 18 June 2023, 16:15 GMT
Reason for closing:  Duplicate
Additional comments about closing:   FS#78814 
Comment by Mark (marcool) - Sunday, 18 June 2023, 15:58 GMT
Ok... my apologies for not doing a bit more research before posting. I had seen this: https://archlinux.org/news/tex-live-package-reorganization/ but I figured that since the /usr/bin/latexmk symlink was in texlive-bin, it would make sense for the file it points to also be there. In fact, latexmk is now in texlive-binextra.

[root@t480 ~]# pacman -S texlive-binextra
resolving dependencies...
looking for conflicting packages...

Package (1) New Version Net Change

extra/texlive-binextra 2023.66594-11 112,67 MiB

Total Installed Size: 112,67 MiB

:: Proceed with installation? [Y/n]
(1/1) checking keys in keyring [#######################################################] 100%
(1/1) checking package integrity [#######################################################] 100%
(1/1) loading package files [#######################################################] 100%
(1/1) checking for file conflicts [#######################################################] 100%
(1/1) checking available disk space [#######################################################] 100%
:: Running pre-transaction hooks...
(1/1) etckeeper: pre-transaction commit
:: Processing package changes...
(1/1) installing texlive-binextra [#######################################################] 100%
:: Running post-transaction hooks...
(1/7) Arming ConditionNeedsUpdate...
(2/7) Updating TeXLive filename database...
(3/7) Updating TeXLive format files...
(4/7) Refreshing PackageKit...
(5/7) Log Orphan Packages
(6/7) za-pacman-post-change-regenerate-installed-list.hook
(7/7) etckeeper: post-transaction commit
[main 45e00b8] committing changes in /etc made by "bash"
5 files changed, 814 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 texmf/chktex/chktexrc
To /root/git/etckeeper
3f5a71b..45e00b8 main -> main
[root@t480 ~]# latexmk
Rc files read:
NONE
Latexmk: This is Latexmk, John Collins, 7 Jan. 2023. Version 4.79.

Latexmk: No file name specified, and I couldn't find any
Use
latexmk -help
to get usage information
[root@t480 ~]#

So that solves the issue I suppose. Maybe just that one question: should the symlink be moved over the texlive-binextra?
Best regards,
Mark.

Loading...