lucida] Lucida installation with RPM

[Michael A. Peters]

On Sat, 2005-12-17 at 11:18 +0100, Andreas Scherer wrote:
> Hello group,
> 
> First, many thanks to all involved for the excellent package and the smooth 
> service!
> 
> Second, I would like to submit a RPM spec file for creating a "real" package 
> of the Lucida fonts on systems that understand that packaging format. (For 
> systems with other packaging managers, the "alien" converter comes to help.)

I would be interesting in helping with this - creating a generic spec
file that should work for anyone.

I don't have the fonts presently - I have to wait until January.
I also don't have a tug membership - again January (since I'm getting
the fonts anyway, it's only a few bucks more to do both).

I do maintain a couple tetex packages for Fedora Extras.

> 
> After reading the recent TUGboat article by Tristan Miller 
> (https://www.tug.org/members/TUGboat/tb26-1/tb82miller-rpm.pdf) about "Using 
> the RPM package manager for (La)TeX packages", I started (sic!) using RPM for 
> all "local" installations on my system (SuSE 9.2 and OpenSUSE 10.0 using RPM; 
> and Ubuntu 5.10 using the DEB format). Instead of just extracting archives 
> like lucida-complete.zip into the appropriate directories of the local TDS, I 
> prefer to use the more advanced approach of using a genuine package manager 
> (i.e., the YaST interface of RPM), giving complete control over the process.
> 
> Although the probability that one would want to _un_install the Lucida fonts 
> approaches zero, RPM helps by registering all installed files and 
> directories; it's much nicer to have the package integrated with the general 
> setup. Moreover, the RPM spec file attached to this email introduces the 
> following modifications of the package installation:
> 
> (a) The "lucida" and "lucidabr" directories are merged for the documentation 
> and the LaTeX macro and font description files respectively.
> (b) The "sources" are not extracted to the local TDS. (OK, it would be extra 
> fun hacking the SPEC %build step starting from scratch. ;-)
> (c) The "lucida.map" file is put into TDS:/fonts/map/fontname instead of into 
> TDS:/fonts/map/dvips (and "lucida.ali" is not installed on my teTeX system). 
> "updmap" is automatically invoked after installing/uninstalling the package.
> 
> I hope that "lucida.spec" might be useful for others who acquire the Lucida 
> distribution. Of course, I would like to get feedback and possible 
> improvements. Enjoy!

I'll look at it and comment.
One comment - 

use Source0: lucida-complete.zip
instead of just Source:

add then use

NoSource: 0

That way you can build and distribute a nosrc.rpm (won't include the
fonts)

Advantage of a nosrc.rpm is that it can be indexed by things like
rpmfind etc. for those looking for it.

Someone can just (assuming they have ~/.rpmmacros properly set up) just
throw the zip file into ~/rpm/SOURCES/ and then run

rpmbuild --rebuild your.src.rpm

and it will throw the resulting rpm into ~/rpm/RPMS/noarch/

-=-
%define texmf /usr/local/share/texmf

I don't like that. I don't like _anything_ owned by rpm in /usr/local

In Fedora - we do

%{!?_texmf: %define _texmf %(eval "echo `kpsewhich -expand-var
'$TEXMFMAIN'`")}

That way the person building it can specify where they want via

rpmbuild --define '_texmf /path/to/custom/texmf'

and the rpm would put everything in /path/to/custom/texmf

If they don't define it, the system texmf is detected from kpsewhich

-=-
I'll look at the spec further later, those are just some immediate
thoughts.