# teXlive port



## jrm@ (Sep 16, 2011)

According to http://code.google.com/p/freebsd-texlive/ there is now a port.  Does anyone know where it is?


----------



## graudeejs (Sep 16, 2011)

You need to install ports-mgmt/portshaker, then you need to install ports-mgmt/portshaker-config (make sure you select TexLive)

Once done, you need to run
`# portshaker`

After it finish, you will have texlive in /usr/ports/print
There are few schemes you can use:

```
print/texlive-scheme-basic
print/texlive-scheme-context
print/texlive-scheme-full
print/texlive-scheme-gust
print/texlive-scheme-medium
print/texlive-scheme-minimal
print/texlive-scheme-tetex
print/texlive-scheme-xml
```

I usually install full.

Also if you want, you can install texlive 2011 packages (few weeks old) from my server:
http://files.bsdroot.lv/my/FreeBSD/FreeBSD-8.2-RELEASE-amd64-2011.09.01-packages/

Either with

```
# pkg_add -r [url]http://files.bsdroot.lv/my/FreeBSD/FreeBSD-8.2-RELEASE-amd64-2011.09.01-packages/All/texlive-scheme-full-20110830.tbz[/url]
```
or

```
# setenv PACKAGESITE http://files.bsdroot.lv/my/FreeBSD/FreeBSD-8.2-RELEASE-amd64-2011.09.01-packages/All/
# pkg_add -r texlive-scheme-full-20110830.tbz
```

However my packages are for amd64 only, if you are on i386, you're out of luck this time 

TIPS:
if you want to install texlive from port, I suggest first you go to scheme that you want to install and do `# make fetch-recursive`
After it's done (might take few hours), then do `# make install clean`
If install fails at some point. Wait a day, update ports with portshaker and try again.

To install scheme full, it can take 1 to 2 days (depending on many factors)
Installing from packages, is Way faster (if you have good speed to my server), but I haven't created downloadable DVD for latest TexLive


Finaly:
Rant at guy, who says he's working on TexLive to be included in FreeBSD ports.... (I don't remember his name). I don't believe he's done anything, as there is only texlive port found in google, and that port is made by Romain TartiÃ¨re


----------



## caesius (Sep 16, 2011)

So what was this talk I heard of there being some legal issues with this software, and that they were the reasons it was not in the ports tree?

Or is it simply a case of no-one has done it yet?


----------



## graudeejs (Sep 16, 2011)

I don't know anything about legal issues.
The only issue that might be (but it's quite easy to fix) is that TexLive packages (files that come from TexLive), are without version numbers.


----------



## caesius (Sep 16, 2011)

I think it was this quote that I was incorrectly recalling:



> We don't. We are waiting Hiroki Sato to port TeXLive to FreeBSD from 2001 or something like that. In the mean time if you really need to use TeX with BSD you have two options. One is two switch to OpenBSD or more recently to NetBSD. The other one is to use unofficial port of Romain TartiÃ¨re which is not allowed to ports three because we do not want to hurt Mr. Sato's feelings.



But yes, I am mistaken about the legal issues. Would be brilliant to have texlive in ports without using portshaker though!


----------



## graudeejs (Sep 16, 2011)

Yes,.... that is sick


----------



## graudeejs (Sep 16, 2011)

We could make petition, to get TexLive in ports.... Perhaps that could help...


----------



## ondra_knezour (Sep 16, 2011)

> We don't. We are waiting Hiroki Sato to port TeXLive to FreeBSD from 2001 or something like that. In the mean time if you really need to use TeX with BSD you have two options. One is two switch to OpenBSD or more recently to NetBSD. The other one is to use unofficial port of Romain TartiÃ¨re which is not allowed to ports three because we do not want to hurt Mr. Sato's feelings.



Has been this port even submited? I found only one non relevant PR about texlive.


----------



## graudeejs (Sep 16, 2011)

That port is a myth.... It only exists if you believe in fairy tales (my opinion)


----------



## ondra_knezour (Sep 16, 2011)

graudeejs said:
			
		

> That port is a myth.... It only exists if you believe in fairy tales (my opinion)



You mean Hiroki Satos port? I don't consider it now, I'm just wondering, why hasn't been Romains port submited as PR, beceuse it is the way how to get it in ports tree. As you can see in PR linked above, miwi@ was willing to take care about it.


----------



## graudeejs (Sep 16, 2011)

ondra_knezour said:
			
		

> You mean Hiroki Satos port? I don't consider it now, I'm just wondering, why hasn't been Romains port submited as PR, beceuse it is the way how to get it in ports tree. As you can see in PR linked above, miwi@ was willing to take care about it.



It was rejected in favor to Hiroki... Epic nonsense


----------



## ondra_knezour (Sep 16, 2011)

Who rejected it? I didn't find any related information in GNATS or lists.


----------

