[tex-live] script for LuaTeX font database updating

Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard mpg at elzevir.fr
Thu Feb 25 23:36:19 CET 2010

Khaled Hosny a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:40:45PM +0100, Reinhard Kotucha wrote:
>> I don't think it's a mistake.  It was a design decision and the way it
>> was done is reasonable:
> I consider a "different behaviour based on executable name" a wrong
> design decision and hence, IMHO, a mistake.
I disagree on this point. It is perhaps a bit unfortunate, but I don't think
it's a mistake.

>> The only difference between a system-wide and a per-user configuration
>> is that files are written to different directories.  Hence, the
>> obvious way to add the new functionality without revising the scripts
>> themselves was to add wrappers.  The scripts were thoroughly tested at
>> this time and providing just wrappers was the safest solution.  Thus I
>> think it was a good decision.
> I don't understand this, how having "different behaviour based on
> executable name" (which still requires editing the script to understand
> this, right?)

No, that is (or was) the point. The script was not edited, a wrapper was used
that just modified the environment before calling the original script.

> Andi, remind you, though this behaviour might be consistent through TeX
> Live utilities, it differs from the rest of the world,

No, look at the man page from GNU grep for example:

       In  addition,  three  variant  programs  egrep,  fgrep  and  rgrep  are
       available.   egrep  is  the  same  as  grep -E.   fgrep  is the same as
       grep -F.  rgrep is the same as grep -r.

> which adds to the
> frustration of newcomers (like me, that why I'm complaining, as all this
> -sys naming did is confusing me like hell).
I agree that many people I confused by the sys scripts (like calling updmap as
root) but I don't think they would be less confused if they had to call updmap
--sys rather than updmap-sys.

> That is because each application is using his own command line options
> parsing routines instead of, say, using GNU's getopt. (This reminds me
> with an issue I was concerned about; we should have a lua getopt like
> library for lua scripts to use to avoid inconstancies like this,

Sure. Reinhard and Norbert started something, you can find it in
texmf/scripts/texlive/lua/texlive but I don't know what's it status. Also, there
are a few getopt-like Lua modules out there, but last time I checked, none was
implementing exactly the GNU syntax, which is probably the more "standard" in

> I guess
> this should be done right now before we start making legacies in the
> Never Changing[TM] TeX world).
Well, when compatibility is broken, people complain. When it is preserved,
people complain. :-)


More information about the tex-live mailing list