[AUCTeX-devel] Re: preview-latex 0.9.1 and AUCTeX 11.whatever

[David Kastrup]

Jan-Åke Larsson <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>>>Dunno. All I know is that without the patch I get
>>>   checking for prefix from kpsepath... "/sw/tex/teTeX/3.0"
>>>   checking for TDS-compliant directory... /sw/tex/teTeX/3.0/texmf-config
>>>which is certainly off the chart,
>> Uh, Jan-Åke?  While I see the utility of your patch, _this_
>> directory
>> seems like a bug.  Possible to find out how it comes about?  I'd like
>> to prevent that particular choice with a bit more safety margin than
>> your patch would provide.
>
> Yes. It matches "${texprefix}". If I have "${texprefix}/texmf"
> instead, that
> is where it will go, despite the nonexistent ${texprefix}/texmf/tex. I
> suppose it is in pathoutput.
>
> Perhaps make that patch
>
>    [['${datadir}/texmf-local' '${datadir}/texmf' \
>      "${texprefix}/texmf-local" "${texprefix}/texmf"]],

I have made it
  [['${datadir}/texmf' "${texprefix}/texmf-local" "${texprefix}/texmf"]],
for now.

Rationale for leaving out ${datadir}/texmf-local:
${datadir} can be one of the following:
a) default /usr/local/share for site-wide installation.
   /usr/local/share/texmf-local will not exist.
b) /usr/share for system installation.  /usr/share/texmf-local is the
   wrong choice for a system installation.
c) something like /home/jalar/share.  texmf-local does not appear to
   make sense unless you have a whole teTeX installed in
   /home/jalar/share, in which case ${texprefix}/texmf-local should do
   the trick.

If we want to have ${datadir}/texmf-local at all, it would appear to
make sense only after the other options as sort of fallback.  But then
the search order would be really weird.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum