texlive2022-20220321.iso installation problem

[George N. White III]

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 5:59 AM <karl at aspodata.se> wrote:

> Zdenek Wagner:
> > pá 20. 5. 2022 v 10:42 odesílatel <karl at aspodata.se> napsal:
> ...
> > > And to Norbert, yes, I put the texlive bin dir. later in the PATH,
> > > soo I can hopefully identify lingering packages, not all are named
> > > *tex*, and some needed are called tex-something.
> > >
> > The problem is that TeX from the linux distros is often incomplete and
> > not all binaries are included.
>
> Hence I wanted texlive, and I didn't need to change the build.
>
> > It can thus happen that sometimes a
> > binary from the linux distro is used, sometimes the one from TL.
> > That's why TL should be at the beginning of the PATH, otherwise in the
> > best case the results are inconsistent, but quite often you use a
> > strange mixture of incompatible files which leads to strange errors. I
> > saw a lot of errors caused by mixing the linux distro and TL TeX.
>
> But I kindof wanted to get rid of unneeded packages...
>

You can make a list of the files in the CTAN texlive bin directory and
then either search for the files with same name in /usr/bin or  use
"type" on each name:

>From years of experience with a range of tex systems and OS's, I can
report that stray programs with names that clash with TeX Live are an
all too common source of weird errors.  Some users learn from the
internet to cure "program not found" by copying "program" to
the directory with their document and putting "." in the PATH.

Something like:

 for f in $('ls' -1 /usr/local/texlive/2022/bin/x86_64-linux|head) ; do
   type $(basename $f)
 done | grep -Fv 'not found'

with the texlive directory removed from the PATH should generate a
list of name clashes with stuff found elsewhere on your PATH.

-- 
George N. White III
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/attachments/20220520/0ff1839a/attachment.html>