Lost /bin/latex?

[Igor Pechtchanski]

On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:

> Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu> writes:
>
> > However, something did go wrong with the installation.  I ended up with
> > invalid symbolic links in /bin (e.g., /usr/bin/initex was a symbolic link
> > to "bin/tex.exe").
>
> Yes, that is correct.  Oh, wait a minute, to bin/tex.exe you say.
> That bug has just been fixed by the new release (20020911-1), that was
> uploaded yesterday just after you posted your message, so I assumed
> you already got the new release.  Could you try upgrading?

Maybe I should, before bringing up any more issues.  I have these problems
with tetex-20020530-3.

> > Also, any attempt to run latex failed with a '(Fatal format file
> > error; I'm stymied)'.
> >
> > This was still a problem after I completely uninstalled and reinstalled
> > the tetex packages (tetex-base, tetex-bin, tetex-extra, tetex, and
> > libkpathsea3).
>
> > Running 'texconfig confall; texconfig rehash; texconfig init; texconfig
> > dvips printcmd -' fixed the 'Fatal error' problem,
>
> This is all very strange.  Did you install using setup.exe?  I'm sure
> you know that these commands are run (and must be run) during postinstall.

Yes, I installed using setup.exe.  Maybe the format file just got
corrupted somehow...

> > but the invalid symbolic links are still there.
>
> What links do you think are invalid?  If it's serious, I might have to
> make a new release.

I meant the links to "bin/*" in /usr/bin...  Let me upgrade to the new
version, though, before blowing the whistle.

> > This sequence of texconfig commands is, for some reason, commented
> > out from the /etc/postinstall/post-tetex.sh, but is present in
> > /etc/postinstall/post-texmf.sh, and I assume has been run (there is
> > no log of the postinstall script invocations, is there?).
>
> post-tetex.sh is something very old.  post-texmf.sh should have been
> run.  If it has, it gets renamed to post-texm.sh.done.  The setup log
> should mention running it, but there is no log, or failure indication
> during the run of setup.exe if anything goes wrong, afaik.

Ok, then.  I had tetex installed for at least 8 months now, so
post-tetex.sh could have been left over from an old installation.  Oh, and
by the way, all the scripts in my /etc/postinstall/ have the .done suffix
- I was just interpolating the names...  So post-texmf.sh did run.  In
fact, I also see the log entry to that regard.

I'll try the upgrade to 20020911-1 now and report the results here.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Water molecules expand as they grow warmer" (C) Popular Science, Oct'02, p.51


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/