[tex-live] Compile fails on Mac OS X Server 10.3.9

[Gerben Wierda]

On Jul 20, 2007, at 18:14, Jonathan Kew wrote:

>
> On 20 Jul 2007, at 8:35 am, Gerben Wierda wrote:
>
>> On Jul 20, 2007, at 15:20, Jonathan Kew wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 20 Jul 2007, at 5:35 am, Akira Kakuto wrote:
>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>> /usr/local/TeXLive-working-copy/Build/source/texk/kpathsea/tex- 
>>>>> file.c:
>>>>> 32:28: kpathsea/paths.h: No such file or directory
>>>>>
>>>>> What has gone wrong? Configure? or SVN?
>>>>>
>>>>> Configure did not make a paths.h. Should it have done so?
>>>>
>>>> I don't know about this problem.
>>>> However, the present head contains some inconsistency
>>>> (tex.ch and XeTeX).
>>>> Therefore you have to use branches/branch2007/Build.
>>>> (or tags/texlive-2007.0/Build, which is the same
>>>>  as the released texlive-2007.)
>>>
>>> Use the latest revision of branches/branch2007/Build rather than  
>>> tags/texlive-2007.0/Build, as this gets you some significant  
>>> bug-fixes.
>>
>> I have neither. My current mirror is the original SVN trunk  
>> svn://gerben@tug.org/texlive/trunk/Build
>>
>> I do not want the original 2007 (if I want that I can take revision  
>> 3972), I would like to have the trunk with all the stable patches.
>>
>> How is this svn tree organized? What if I want a fully patched but  
>> stable TL. Do I take branches/branch2007 and I have patches there for  
>> Build & Master? Or is Master organized different from Build?
>
> For the Build side, branches/branch2007 is supposed to be stable but  
> include important patches to the 2007 release; trunk is an unstable  
> development line that will presumably stabilize as we approach the  
> time for the next release.
>
> As for Master, I don't know if anyone is keeping track of patches that  
> could reasonably be applied to TL2007 and still considered stable, as  
> opposed to the unstable development in trunk. It would be good to  
> apply low-risk bug-fix patches to branches/branch2007, but AFAIK that  
> hasn't been happening.

So branches/branch2007 does have a Master tree, but it is not updated  
while the Build tree there is?

> Basing a distribution on trunk at this point in the release cycle  
> would seem risky, though, as I don't think it gets continual  
> regression testing or anything like that.

In the past I have worked with most recent Masters in combination with  
various revisions of Build. This has worked pretty well. Stuff in  
Master generally is pretty backwards compatible.

> For the purposes of a distribution like yours, my suggestion would be  
> to use branches/branch2007, and if there are Master patches that are  
> needed (e.g., package where you know there were problems in the 2007  
> release, and there are now fixed versions) then apply those to  
> branch2007/Master as well.

I don't have time to do that kind of maintenance, sorry.

> You might find that the Debian folks have a coherent set of patches  
> based on the February release, adding fixes for whatever specific bugs  
> they're aware of.

It would be nice if someone could keep branches/branch2007  
stable-with-patches.

G