[tex-live] For Mister Karl Berry, requesting assistance concerning some so-called “orphaned” texlive-… software packages in my 64-bit, openSUSE, Leap-15.4, Linux installation following an upgrade from an openSUSE, Leap-15.3, installation of a Linux operating system

[Dr. Werner Fink]

Hi Lawrence,

IMHO this does not belong to tex-live at tug.org.  And yes there *are* changes
between TeXLive packages from 2017 from SLE-15/Leap15 trees and 2022 as
found on https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/Publishing:/TeXLive/openSUSE_Leap_15.4/
for Leap 15.4. And herein packages had disapeared, renamed, splitted, or replaced.
For SLE-15.4 as well as Leap 15.4 I've taken TeXLive 2021 as this was the last
stable and well known, as well as known working without poppler as well as with
python3 and the version 2022 was fresh out and not tested well on opensuse platforms.
At least I had no feedback up to the time of doing the required update for
SLE-15.4 (and 15.4).

All those questions should belong to a mailing list here at opensuse.org

Werner

On 2022/09/20 23:21:17 -0400, Lawrence Patrick Somerville wrote:
> Hello, Mister Karl Berry. I have been obtaining software packages which
> probably originated in some versions of Teχ Live via the openSUSE or
> OpenSUSE distribution of a Linux operating system since at least December
> of the year 2013 when I began using Oracle VM (Virtual Machine) VirtualBox
> in a Windows operating system on a then-new, 64-bit notebook computer and
> having my openSUSE operating system as a VM in VirtualBox. And in recent
> years I have been upgrading my openSUSE Leap distribution of a Linux
> operating system about once a year with updates to texlive-… software
> packages subsequently installed from openSUSE, Leap, online software
> repositories. After upgrading Leap, version 15.3 to Leap, version 15.4 in
> June of the year 2022 I found that I had the following list of texlive-…
> software packages which were categorized as “orphaned,” meaning that
> software packages with the following names were no longer being supplied
> through any openSUSE, Leap-15.4, online repository. Notice that the
> “orphaned” texlive-… software packages below are labeled with probably the
> year 2017. For example, texlive-mychemistry was installed in July of the
> year 2021. So I probably obtained that version of texlive-chemistry, which
> I supposed may have originated as a part of Teχ Live 2017, via an openSUSE
> online repository while I had Leap 15.3 installed in VirtualBox. Since on
> September 9, 2022, for example, no newer version of texlive-mychemistry was
> offered for installation from an openSUSE online repository for Leap 15.4,
> I guess that the software package texlive-mychemistry might have been
> discontinued beginning with some version of Teχ Live during the interval of
> years 2018-2021. In contrast in my present, Leap-15.4 installation most of
> my installed texlive... software packages appear to have come from Teχ Live
> 2021.
> 
> 
> *Questions: *Despite the problems with the coronavirus in the world, were Teχ
> Live 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 all produced? If not, which versions of Teχ
> Live during the years 2018-2021 were not produced?
> 
> 
> *A question:* If Teχ Live 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 were all produced, can
> you refer me to, for example, some so-called “changelogs” for Teχ Live
> 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 which would list the Teχ Live software packages
> which would be discontinued from the previously issued version of Teχ Live?
> 
> 
> I have probably many texlive... software packages installed in my Leap-15.4
> installation which I have not been using in Leap-15.4 or even in some
> earlier versions of openSUSE. It is even conceivable that some Teχ Live
> 2017 software packages obtained via some earlier version of openSUSE might
> still work in my Leap-15.4 installation and therefore should not be removed
> due to being non-functional. Of course I would prefer to avoid problems
> caused by removing software packages; yet when such a removal would not
> cause problems for the rest of my installed computer software, I would be
> in favor of such a removal to avoid wasteful storage of computer software
> and to eliminate software which might even be unusable in my Leap-15.4
> installation. On September 13, 2022 below were my results for “orphaned,”
> just texlive-… software packages in my Leap 15.4 installation when I was
> probably using the Linux kernel version 5.14.21-150400.24.18-default (I
> removed all of the other “orphaned” software packages from my Leap-15.4
> installation.).
> 
> 
> S | Repository | Name | Version | Arch
> 
> ---+------------+--------------------------------------+---------------------------------+-------
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-babel-spanglish | 2017.135.0.0.3svn37629-6.16 |
> noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-babel-spanglish-doc | 2017.135.0.0.3svn37629-6.16 |
> noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-bezos | 2017.133.svn25507-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-bezos-doc | 2017.133.svn25507-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-einfuehrung | 2017.133.svn29349-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-einfuehrung2 | 2017.133.svn39153-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-FAQ-en | 2017.133.3.28svn34303-6.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-genmisc | 2017.133.svn27208-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-geometry-de | 2017.133.1.1svn21882-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-ifetex | 2017.133.1.2svn24853-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-ifetex-doc | 2017.133.1.2svn24853-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-ifxetex | 2017.133.0.0.6svn19685-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-ifxetex-doc | 2017.133.0.0.6svn19685-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-knuth | 2017.133.svn32899-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-knuth-doc | 2017.133.svn32899-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-latex-bib-ex | 2017.133.svn25831-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-latex-bib2-ex | 2017.133.svn40098-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-latex-referenz | 2017.137.2svn36671-7.6.4 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-latex-tabellen | 2017.137.svn16979-7.6.4 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-lua2dox | 2017.133.0.0.2svn29349-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-lua2dox-bin | 2017.20170520.svn29053-19.4 | x86_64
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-lua2dox-doc | 2017.133.0.0.2svn29349-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-math-e | 2017.133.svn20062-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-mychemistry | 2017.133.1.99bsvn28611-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-mychemistry-doc | 2017.133.1.99bsvn28611-5.18 |
> noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-presentations | 2017.133.svn43949-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-presentations-en | 2017.133.svn29803-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-spanish-mx | 2017.133.1.1asvn15878-4.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-spanish-mx-doc | 2017.133.1.1asvn15878-4.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-sympytexpackage | 2017.133.svn41190-4.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-sympytexpackage-doc | 2017.133.svn41190-4.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-tabulars-e | 2017.134.1.0svn21191-5.18 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-wasy2-ps | 2017.136.svn35830-10.15 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-wasy2-ps-doc | 2017.136.svn35830-10.15 | noarch
> 
> i+ | @System | texlive-wasy2-ps-fonts | 2017.136.svn35830-10.15 | noarch
> 
> 
> I would like to know whether any of above, “orphaned,” texlive-… software
> packages would be functional in my Leap-15.4 installation or not. Possibly
> relating to this question, I found indications from
> *https://www.educba.com/linux-distributions/
> <https://www.educba.com/linux-distributions/>* and
> *https://www.texdev.net/2011/10/29/tex-live-in-linux-distributions/
> <https://www.texdev.net/2011/10/29/tex-live-in-linux-distributions/>* on
> the Internet that a version of a texlive-… software package provided via a
> distributor of a Linux operating system might possibly be kernel dependent.
> Then in Yet another Software Tool (YaST) Software for the package named
> “texlive” I saw that its version number included both “2021” for probably
> the year of Teχ Live and “150400”, which was part of my then-running Linux
> kernel version of probably “5.14.21-150400.24.18-default”! And that same
> number of “150400” appears in numerous other texlive-… software package
> version numbers which also include the number “2021” in them. So I suppose
> that many texlive-… software packages in my Leap-15.4 installation with
> both “2021” and “150400” in their version numbers may be dependent on at
> least the current series of Linux kernels which include “150400” in their
> version numbers. Similarly among a large number of the “orphaned,”
> texlive-… software packages in my Leap-15.4 installation I found that their
> version numbers include both “2017” and “5.18” in their version numbers.
> And among them, for example texlive-knuth and texlive-tabulars-e, were
> installed in my Leap-15.4 installation on July 13, 2021 when I was using
> Leap 15.3. And in my former Leap-15.3 installation I was usually, if not
> always using Linux kernels with “5.3.18” in their version numbers. So I
> suppose that all members of that set of “orphaned,” texlive-… software
> packages were kernel dependent. For the remaining 10, “orphaned” texlive-…
> sofware packages which all have “2017” in their version numbers, but not
> “5.18” in their version numbers, all ten of them were installed on July 13,
> 2021 in my then, Leap-15.3 installation.
> 
> 
> So here is what I suppose or speculate that openSUSE developers might have
> been doing concerning texlive-... software packages: a) obtaining them in
> primitive forms, perhaps as source-code files from Teχ Live from the Teχ
> Users Group (TUG) or perhaps the Comprehensive Teχ Archive Network (CTAN),
> b) perhaps modifying them in ways to make them usable in the latest version
> of openSUSE with its Linux kernels, possibly backporting some
> kernel-appropriate computer code; and c) providing such a modified software
> package in an openSUSE, online repository. In anticipation of the types of
> content to be used in Linux kernels in Leap 15.4 perhaps those so-produced,
> texlive-… software packages did not need to be compiled at the time of
> their installations, but instead might have been released from an online
> openSUSE repository having already been compiled. In an openSUSE online
> forum as of September 19 or 20, 2022 no one had confirmed or denied my
> speculations in this paragraph. *Possibly help me here.*--You may correct
> me if you know that any of my thinking in this paragraph and my previous
> paragraph is incorrect.
> 
> 
> Some relevance of part of my previous discussion to deciding whether or not
> to remove “orphaned,” texlive-… software packages is that it is conceivable
> that such texlive-… packages produced for use in one set of Linux kernels
> used in my Leap-15.3 installation might not work in the Linux kernels in
> and to be used in my Leap-15.4 installation; and if those “orphaned”
> texlive-… software packages would turn out to not work in my Leap-15.4
> installation, I should remove them from my Leap-15.4 installation.
> 
> 
> There is a possibility that the function of an old texlive-… software
> package from Teχ Live 2017 could have been replaced by a texlive-… software
> package with a different name in a year-2018, 2019, 2020, or 2021 version
> of Teχ Live; and if such a replacement of function was indeed made, the
> old, “orphaned,” texlive-… software package should be removed from my
> Leap-15.4 installation; and in that case in order to continue to have the
> function of the old texlive-… software package in its replacement texlive-…
> software package, I should install that replacing texlive-… software
> package in my Leap-15.4 installation, assuming that a Leap-15.4, online,
> software repository would supply it. An imaginable way that such a
> possibility might be checked might be to scan the so-called “changelogs”
> for the year-2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 versions of Teχ Live, if they were
> all thoroughly produced and can be found somewhere online.
> 
> 
> *A question:* If so, can you refer me to any online, complete “changelogs”
> for Teχ Live 2018, 2019, 2020, and/or 2021 which will enable me to
> determine whether the function of my “orphaned” texlive-… software packages
> has been replaced by any texlive-… software packages with new or different
> names than my installed, “orphaned,” texlive-... software packages?
> 
> 
> To somehow learn how to work with each of 35, relatively old,“orphaned,”
> texlive-… software packages and afterward to test each of them, one at a
> time, in a LaTeχ, .tex file using one or both of the computer programs
> pdflatex and/or bibtex might take a large amount of time!
> 
> 
> *A question:* So instead is there a way I may determine en masse, or in a
> group, whether each of the installed “orphaned” texlive-... packages will
> be functional or not in my Leap-15.4 installation, perhaps in a short .tex
> file which would include a \usepackage{…} statement and between those
> braces have all of the “orphaned” texlive-... package names minus
> “texlive-” in each case and separated by commas?

-- 
 Dr. Werner Fink -- Software Engineer Consultant
 SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH,  Frankenstraße 146,  90461 Nürnberg,
 Germany, GF: Ivo Totev, DE 322 919 152, HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg),
 phone: +49-911-740-53-0,  fax: +49-911-3206727,  www.opensuse.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  "Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
          a peeing section in a swimming pool." -- Edward Burr
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 894 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/attachments/20220922/f033e49b/attachment-0001.sig>