Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML

  1. #1

    Default In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML

    1. How may I remove all of TeX Live 2012 and all LaTeX-related software packages from an openSUSE-12.3, Linux operating system in which 227 software packages are installed, each with either the combination of letters "texlive" or "latex" appears within its name? Interdependencies among TeX Live 2012 and/or LaTeX-related software packages might make this complicated in Yet another Software Tool 2 (YaST2). For example, should the various packages be uninstalled in a certain order using YaST2? A few rm (remove) commands in a terminal program, one for each of a few directories, as a root user is another imaginable way one might perform such an uninstallation. Or an rpm (Red-Hat Package Manager) command as a root user with one or more asterisks in it is another imaginable way to perform the uninstallation. But again due to interdependencies of software packages perhaps the uninstallations of software packages might need to be performed in a certain order. The directory structure looks like this in my openSUSE-12.3 system: /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/html; I also found probably a Perl script file entitled latex2html in the directory /usr/bin.
    2. I suppose that TeX Live 2012 should be uninstalled before installing TeX Live 2013 in openSUSE 12.3. But is that installation advisable in openSUSE 12.3 on July 16, 2013 when TeX Live 2013 is I suppose not yet provided via openSUSE repositories? I know that TeX Live 2013 can be obtained via a Web page or hyperlink of the Comprehensive TeX Archive Network (CTAN). Does anyone have a working procedure for making such an installation of TeX Live 2013, LaTeX, and LaTeX2HTML in openSUSE 12.3? If so, what is it?
    3. In the first quarter of the year 2013 I had a working installation of LaTeX2HTML 1.71 and LaTeX in an openSUSE-12.2, Linux operating system. All indications I have found are that LaTeX was part of TeX Live 2011 in my openSUSE-12.2 installation. Then in late March of the year 2013 I switched to using openSUSE 12.3, which appears to be using TeX Live 2012 components. But I had troubles running LaTex2HTML on a new .tex file with the word "Image" appearing instead of the fraction 1/2 in a part of an equation. I returned to each of two backups of my hard-disk-drive data which used openSUSE 12.3.--For the March 21, 2013 state of such data LaTeX2HTML 1.71 could be used to process an old .tex file with gratefully good-looking mathematics in the output, .html (HyperText Markup Language) file. But when such a .tex file's contents were "pasted" into a blank file in the text editor Kate, that file was then saved as a .tex file, and that file was processed with "latex" and "latex2html ......tex" commands, again the word "Image" appeared in an equation instead of the desired mathematics in the output, .html (HyperText Markup Language) file. So far I do not know for certain the cause of or remedied that problem. But I have two general hypotheses or guesses for its cause: A) My 227 software packages, which were installed using YaST2, but not all with one clicking of the "Accept" button in YaST2, might not be well-integrated together, for example in an ls-R file. B) Or there might be a problem to get LaTeX2HTML 1.71 working with TeX Live 2012 and/or openSUSE 12.3 in the case of a newly saved, .tex file. Could someone kindly report here the results of such an experiment with a new .tex file and LaTeX and LaTeX2HTML 1.71 in TeX Live 2012 and openSUSE 12.3 for me? If "A" is the problem, then uninstalling TeX Live 2012 and LaTeX2HTML 1.71 and then installing the minimum number of software packages for LaTeX and LaTeX2HTML with parts of TeX Live 2012, and doing these things together with one click of the "Accept" button in YaST2, is one, at least imaginable approach toward possibly eliminating the problem.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,450

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    1. Unless you have a really esoteric need, you shouldn't be thinking of updating to TeXLive 2013.
    2. If you know the exact esoteric package(s) that you need, it should be feasible to download and replace only those packages rather than doing a complete reinstall.
    3. You would have had the 2008 edition of latex2html previously; the next edition was 2012 which is presumably what you have installed now. latex2html has barely been updated over the last ten years; according to CTAN there is no new edition which would be in TeXLive 2013. So it would be better to sort out the problems you have with the current edition.

    My experience is that there are random failures in the conversion but none that are not easy to correct by hand. Note also that it does not convert to HTML5 - so you should not be using it on a modern website.

    P.S. I use it because it is the easiest way to export LaTeX files to Word format without losing any of the LaTeX formating.

  3. #3

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    Thanks, John Hudson, for kindly taking some time to post a reply to my posting in this thread. My openSUSE-12.3 computer software's response to "latex2html --version" was, in part, "LaTeX2HTML Version 2008 (1.71)." So I think 1.71 and 2008 are probably just two different ways to refer to the same version of LaTeX2HTML. It appears that I installed LaTeX2HTML 1.71 and openSUSE 11.3 in late August of the year 2010. Since then I used versions 11.3, 12.1, 12.2, and 12.3 of openSUSE. But the version 1.71 of LaTeX2HTML has probably not been changed on my computer during the period of late August of the year 2010 through today, July 17, 2013. After fresh installations of LaTeX2HTML 1.71, following Shigeharu Takeno's kindly provided advice a # was placed before the line $DVIPSOPT .= "-Ppdf"; or else $DVIPSOPT .= '-Ppdf -E'; to "comment out" that line from being executed by I suppose the Perl compiler. However, in March of the year 2013 I found that the first of those changes had already been made for me. Again following Shigeharu Takeno's advice, this time at [l2h] mathend000# to eliminate mathend000# for a mathematical expression in a LaTeX2HTML, .html (HyperText Markup Language) output file, question marks as indicated below were inserted in two lines of code in the file /usr/bin/latex2html:

    $math_verbatim_rx ="$verbatim_mark#?math(\\d+)#";
    $mathend_verbatim_rx ="$verbatim_mark#?mathend([^#]*)#";

    . Probably after making the above changes LaTeX2HTML 1.71 has been working for me in openSUSE 11.3, 12.1, and 12.2. So I do not really expect the problem I report here now to be a problem with the LaTeX2HTML 1.71 code itself, but rather with software exterior to LaTeX2HTML 1.71 that it needs to access or use.

    In openSUSE 12.3, which began using TeX Live 2012, I have had "Image" appearing in .html files instead of some mathematics, for example involving a fraction, after a "latex2mtl ...tex" command was executed on a newly constructed .tex file. And today I discovered that this fraction problem occurred in a fraction in the .html ouput file when in the .tex file \frac{1}{2} was enclosed by $....$ in text or appeared in equation mode.

    I found what might be a hint to the cause of this problem when looking at my notes from my March, 2013 installation of software packages with "texlive" or "latex" in their names. Those 227 packages were not all installed by clicking Yet another Software Tool 2's (YaST2's) "Accept" "button" once. My notes show that at that time I was informed to run or consider running "mktexlsr --syncwithtrees", which was something I had not tried until July 17, 2013. Looking at http://neverbow.blogspot.com/2006/09...y-texlive.html on the Internet it appears that the commands to input as a root user should instead be:

    mktexlsr
    updmap-sys --syncwithtrees
    texexec --make

    . I tried inputting those three commands as a root user on July 17, 2013. The command mktexlsr updated ls-R files, which according to texhash(1): create ls-R databases - Linux man page are databases used by the kpathsea library I think so that some things in a TeX Live or TeX-related installation can be "found" by computer programs. After entering "texexec --make" lots of output ensued, resulting in the message "I can't find 'plain.tex' " appearing. In addition, on July 24, 2013 there was an issue using TeX Live 2012 in the file updmap.cfg in which Allen Munn suggested replacing the line ${PKGNAME}.map with "bguq.map". I found the file updmap.cfg in the directory /usr/lib/texmf/web2c in my installation of openSUSE 12.3. But within that file I did not find either of the lines ${PKGNAME} or bgup.map. So I just guess that that problem with updmap itself in TeX Live 2012 might have been fixed since July 24, 2012.

    So if I am "on the right track" with "A" in my previous posting in this thread, then there may be two approaches to solving it: A1) to somehow enable the file plain.tex to be "found" by texexec or A2) to uninstall TeX Live 2012, LaTeX, and LaTeX2HTML 1.71 and reinstall them in minimal fashion all with one click of an "Accept" button in YaST2. In this way one could hope that the ls-R databases would all be properly built and up to date concerning all of the installed, TeX-related software packages in an openSUSE 12.3 installation. And hopefully that would enable all of the needed things to be "found" by the kpathsea library. But if after that I in YaST2 install more software packages with "texlive" or "latex" in their names, I may need to as a root user execute the above three commands and, for the third one of them, for the file plain.tex to be found by texexec (item A1 here).

    Here is an example of the problems one might encounter when uninstalling and reinstalling a LaTeX-, LaTeX2HTML-, or TeX-related package in YaST2 when TeX Live 2012 components are already installed in openSUSE 12.3. I uninstalled the openSUSE-12.3 software package entitled "latex2html." Then in YaST2 I reinstalled it. And afterward I did not enter of the above three commands which include the command mktexlsr. The result on attempting to execute a command of the form "latex MyFile.tex" was that the file html.sty was not "found" by the program LaTeX. After copying the file html.sty from /usr/lib/texmf/tex/latex/html to my directory in which I store .tex files and executing a command of the form "latex MyFile.tex," this was what one might call a "workaround" solution that apparently enabled LaTeX to "locate" a copy of the file html.sty. But that copying should not have been necessary.---I guess the reason why html.sty was not "found" by LaTeX after the reinstallation of the package latex2html may have been that an ls-R file may have needed updating after the reinstallation of the openSUSE 12.3 software package entitled latex2html.

    I am still interested in a good procedure for uninstalling all of the software packages of TeX Live 2012 and LaTeX2HTML from openSUSE 12.3 (references: item 1 and item 3, subitem "A" in my previous posting in this thread). The interest in that case would be properly reinstalling TeX Live 2012, LaTeX, and LaTeX2HTML 1.71 so that they all can work well together. But I would appreciate help with either of the items A1 or A2 here in this posting.

    Also thanks, John Hudson, for pointing out that LaTeX2HTML 1.71 does not work for HTML 5. I have been using it with HTML 3.2 lately. But this has not been a problem for my use of LaTeX2HTML thus far. What I have been doing is producing write-ups containing Greek letters and/or mathematics and sending my write-ups to people via electronic mail using attachments. Although this was not my original purpose in this thread, perhaps someone can here suggest a way to convert a .html file produced using LaTeX2HTML using HTML 3.2 or 4.0 to a .html file using HTML 5.0.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,450

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    Not having had the problems you have had, I cannot really comment on the issues with latex2html other than to say that the bulk of the program was completed in 2002 and has only, AFAIK, had minor revisions since then; so there are many newer LaTeX packages which it cannot cope with.

    When I run it I get images for mathematics and assume that is because, when it was written, there was no other way of representing maths on the web.

    You could try Update Unconditionally in the Package Tab once you have selected all your TeXLive packages in YaST; this will replace your existing installation and rerun all the scripts that are run when the packages are first installed. However, it will not clean up packages that it does think are part of the standard installation.

    There isn't any way as yet to convert from LaTeX to HTML5 except by hand (though, because HTML5 expects you to use a CSS file for styling, it is very easy to create a CSS file with analogues of the LaTeX paragraph styles and so get the same consistency through your pages as you would in LaTeX).

    When you talk about Greek and maths, do you mean Greek letters as used in maths or do you mean Greek letters with breathings (polytonic Greek)? If the former, you can find all the Greek letters in the maths symbols (see http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/inf...symbols-a4.pdf ); if the latter, you need to use XeTeX.

    Do the people who receive your documents need to edit them or just read them? If the latter, send everthing as PDF. If the former, is it because you want them to work on them? If so, you may be better installing LyX which offers full change management and version control of LaTeX, XeTeX and LuaTeX documents - but won't, as yet, handle polytonic Greek - it is coming in the next version.

  5. #5

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    Thanks again, John Hudson, for kindly taking some time to reply to my most recent posting in this thread. To correlate my answers with your most recent posting in this thread I'll refer to your paragraphs by numbers in the order in which they appear in your posting.

    1 and 2: With the edits I mentioned in my previous posting in this thread LaTeX2HTML 1.71 worked fine for me with TeX Live 2011 components in openSUSE 12.2 as recently as in February of the year 2013.

    3: Your suggestion of updating the relevant software packages unconditionally, presumably in Yet another Software Tool 2 (YaST2), appears good to me, especially if my guess of what you mean in the following sentence of yours is correct: "However, it will not clean up packages that it does think are part of the standard installation." I think that none of TeX Live 2012 came with the openSUSE-12.3, Digital Video Disc (DVD), .iso (International Standards Organization) file for downloading from the Internet. So I had to download from the Internet and install software packages with "texlive" and "latex" in their names after installing openSUSE 12.3 from the Recordable DVD (DVD-R) that I produced from the .iso file I just mentioned using Nero software. So if by standard installation you meant software packages included in the .iso to be downloaded for installing openSUSE 12.3, that set of TeX Live 2012, LaTeX, and LaTeX2HTML software packages may fortunately for me be the empty set. And in that case your suggestion of updating my relevant installed software package unconditionally may result in all 227 installed software packages with either "texlive" and "latex" in their names being updated; but far more important than that to me in so doing is your phrase that appears to allow a "rerun" of "all the scripts that are run when the packages are first installed."----That is where I see the great potential benefit of your suggestion for me because there is the hope that with one click of the "Accept button" for the 227 packages those packages might be installed in a "happy community mutually working well together with each other!" However, I should see whether there is a way to select for unconditional updating a whole group of packages or not in YaST2.---If there isn't such a way, I may have to be patient to select them for unconditional updating not quite one at a time in the right panel of YaST2's Software Management window, assuming dependent packages are automatically selected to be unconditionally updated when the main package is selected to be updated unconditionally.

    4. Can you provide a reference to a detailed procedure, perhaps with an example of the procedure, for making a .html (HyperText Markup Language) file produced by LaTeX2HTML workable in HTML 5.0? Here some thoughts come to mind about some things, one or more of which of I am confident and one or more of which I am not as confident. From my memory of checking some samples, my documents produced with LaTeX2HML and HTML 3.2 have been readable in one or more cases in at least the Konqueror and Mozilla Firefox Web browsers. For a browser which can display HTML-5.0 code or tags, then I suppose it may be often also be able to display HTML-3.2 code; in other words the browser may be "backwards-compatible" when it comes to versions of HTML. If and assuming so, that is good news. So if one has control of a Web site and, if necessary, enables it to display HTML-3.2 code, then the hope would be that "visitors" to that Web site would be using Web browsers that would be backwards compatible with HTML versions and therefore have no problems properly viewing the HTML-3.2 code at the Web site. But suppose one has to use HTML-5.0 code or tags to have his content displayed on a particular Web site, perhaps because the computer software being used on the server computer requires it. Imaginably this might be the case at a university, institute, or college Web site with the server software set up for use by one or more Internet Technology (IT) professionals. So imaginably for a professor who wants to produce his Web pages containing mathematics for display for his students on his school's Web site using LaTeX2HTML and HTML 3.2 or 4.0, he may have to convert his so-produced cascading style sheets (.css) and/or .html files to files appropriate for HTML 5.0. Then in that situation what you wrote about HTML 5.0 may be very important after using LaTeX2HTML to produce documents. But let's go back to an assumption here. Is it true that these days some computer software used on server computers requres HTML 5.0 code? If so, then perhaps there might be a need to develop server-computer software that will be very flexible to enable HTML-3.2, 4.0, 5.0 and other kinds of code to all be displayable on a Web site.

    5. Almost all of my use of Greek letters in my .html documents produced using LaTeX2HTML have been in the context of mathematics. But in one, still unfinished and undistributed document I used a few Greek words. As I recall I think the problem with the fictitious example $\alpha\beta\gamma$ in LaTeX code was in having too much space between the alpha, beta, and gamma in the .html output file produced using LaTeX2HTML. I had some kindly provided help from Lucio Chiappetti on this matter. For example, to have the Greek word pronounced kronos, meaning time in the English language, in the output, .html file produced by LaTeX2HTML, hexadecimal, Unicode expressions were used in the LaTeX code for each of the Greek letters in that Greek word, as in

    \latex2html{$\chi\rho o\nu o\varsigma$}{\begin{rawhtml}χρονος\end{rawhtml}

    I found that either of the options or groups of options -html_version3.2,math or -html_version4.0,math,unicode in a "latex2html .......tex" command was or were workable with the above line of LaTeX code.

    Alternatively Nassar M. Abassi kindly reported that HTLaTeX instead of LaTeX2HTML in a command of the form "htlatex MyFile.tex" could be used to produce a Greek word in a .html file when the LaTeX-coded file with a name of the form MyFile.tex included a line of LaTeX code like the following:

    \greektext qronoc \latintext

    , in which the command \greektext qronoc is to produce the Greek word pronounced kronos, meaning time, and \latintext is used afterward to return to using Latin letters in the English language.

    I don't recall hearing or reading of Greek letters with breathings or polytonic Greek prior to your mentioning it. And even now I think I likely do not understand exactly what those expressions mean.

    6. My LaTeX2HTML-produced documents have been sent to people for them to read, if they have the time and wish to do so, instead of for them to directly edit. As such I did not provide a convenient means for my readers to directly edit those documents. Of course one or more of my readers could report to me one or more errors in my writing in a electronic-mail letter, if he or she wished to do so. Concerning sending Portable Document Format (.pdf) files to my readers for documents produced using LaTeX code, so far I think I have only done that with one document. That was because that document included both mathematics and the Mandarin Chinese language. The hope was that my Chinese friend could print out onto paper my .pdf document, write his corrections of my Mandarin Chinese on it, and then somehow send back to me his corrections. So if that were done, that would be an example of indirectly editing my .pdf document, not directly editiing the .pdf file I sent him. In August of the year 2010 I produced that .pdf document in OpenSuSE-11.1 Linux finally by exporting a .dvi (DeVice-Independent) file into the Portable Document Format using the program KDVI (which might stand for K DeVice-Independent). And the .dvi file was produced using LaTeX with a command of the form "latex MyFile.tex". Also it appears that I somehow had that .pdf document double-spaced to allow my Chinese friend room to write his corrections between my lines of text after printing out onto paper my .pdf document. If there is a way to directly edit a .pdf document using the computer program Adobe Reader XI, I have not been successful in doing that (I tried to paste text from a WordPad document into a .pdf document today using Adobe Reader XI, but appeared to be unsuccessful in doing that.). For awhile I was working toward producing a write-up on mostly mathematics that also included a couple of animated figures, all incorporated into a .pdf file. With some kindly provided help from Alexander Grahn on dealing with the animations, they gratefully worked for me using I think using a pdflatex instead of a latex2html ..... command. But unfortunately on examining the appearance of the so-produced .pdf file I saw some other things which appeared undesirable to me. In principle with perhaps with some time and additional knowledge, some or all of those undesirable things could be remedied. Instead of remedying those things I returned to attempting to produce that write-up using LaTeX2HTML. I have not completed and distributed that write-up.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,450

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    3 TeXLive is in the Index of /repositories/Publishing/openSUSE_12.3 repository; it is much too big to fit on the installation .iso. So, by standard installation, I meant what is in this repository, rather than what you might get by downloading packages from other sources.


    The disadvantage of getting packages from other sources is that you may have to read the documentation closely to discover what scripts to run manually.


    4 No; it isn't practical because of the extent of the changes in HTML5; for example, the <div> tag is deprecated in HTML5 and replaced by the <article>, <section>, <main>, <nav> and <aside> tags each of which has a specific purpose; so you would need very powerful heuristics to determine how to replace each <div> in an HTML4 file.


    In relation to mathematics, HTML5 provides the <math> tag which allows you to embed MathML code in an HTML5 document. There are already LaTeX to MathML converters (http://math.etsu.edu/LaTeXMathML/); so it is possible to create the necessary MathML from LaTeX to embed in a <math> tag.


    The whole point of HTML5 is that it can read obsolete tags and XHTML and render them correctly - one reason why a lot of web designers aren't bothering to update their web sites. But, that places a heavy maintenance and rendering overhead on the site.


    Nothing requires HTML5 because modern browsers will render obsolete code but, without HTML5, a lot of mobile 'phones and tablets will not be able to use the specialised features that have been introduced for them. Older websites are full of Javascript to cope with the differences between different interfaces; HTML5 has a lot of this built in, avoiding the need for scripts which slow down the rendering.


    5 The way you are doing this is fine but, if you use XeTeX instead of LaTeX, you can include Greek in an English text by setting the font to New Athena Unicode; New Athena also has lower case Greek letters (and the polytonic characters but I've no experience of using those in LaTeX yet):


    Code:
    \documentclass[british]{scrartcl}
    \usepackage{fontspec}
    \setmainfont[Ligatures=TeX]{New Athena Unicode}
    \usepackage{color}
    \usepackage{babel}
    \begin{document}
    This is an example of Greek text in English:
    
    
    ΑΓΑΡΕ
    \end{document}

    6. You cannot edit a PDF document in Adobe Reader; that is the whole point: Adobe let people have the Reader free and charge the earth for the editor. But, if you are using LaTeX, you have pdftex, (pdflatex is simply a wrapper for pdftex) and, if you need to change a PDF, simply edit your LaTeX source and generate another PDF. In fact, if you use the hyperref package, you can produce more sophisticated PDFs than many commercial PDF creators.


    I use KOMAScript all the time and this has a 'draft' option which creates a PDF with little black rectangles at the ends of all the lines which require attention (sometimes you cannot see that they do). This may help you to track down any undesirable rendering in a PDF.

  7. #7

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    Thanks, John Hudson, for kindly taking some time to write some more things in this thread. I tried the experiment of unconditionally updating all of the installed software packages in my installation of openSUSE 12.3 with "texlive" and/or "latex" in their names and then as a root user editing the two lines of /usr/bin/latex2html, as I mentioned earlier in this thread. I report two results: 1) Executing a command of the form "latex MyFile.tex" worked without the necessity of having the file html.sty in my working directory containing my .tex files. So gratefully that was an improvement. 2) But unfortunately the fraction LaTeX-coded by \frac{1}{2} was still displayed as "Image" in the HyperText Markup Language (.html) output file produced by a command of the general form "latex2html ............ MyFile.tex". Imaginable options now are A) to reinstall openSUSE 12.3 after reformatting the openSUSE-containing partition of my computer's hard-disk drive, to update it, and to install various software packages containing "texlive" and/or "latex" in their names; B) to return to using LaTeX2HTML 1.71 in TeX Live 2011 and openSUSE 12.2; C) by someone's guess or using diagnostic output to find and remedy the cause of the present problem in my installations of LaTeX2HTML 1.71, TeX Live 2012, and openSUSE 12.3. But in case there turns out to be a general problem with the combination of LaTeX2HTML 1.71, TeX Live 2012, and openSUSE 12.3, it might be helpful for me to know if anyone else has been successful in processing new .tex files using "latex" and "latex2html ......" commands with that combination of software or not because if there is such a general problem, then option "A" here may not remedy the problem. Below I include some details.

    Of the 227 software packages I had installed in openSUSE 12.3 with "texlive" and/or "latex" in their names, six of them named telive-fonts-extra, texlive-fonts-extra-doc, texlive-bin, texlive-bin-omega, texlive-bin-tex4ht, and texlive-doc were dated with the year 2011 in a red color in Yet another Software Tool 2's (YaST2's) Software Management. Looking at my notes from March of the year 2013 I discovered that I had upgraded or updated from openSUSE 12.2 to openSUSE 12.3. Therefore it seemed likely that those six software packages were residual packages from TeX Live 2011 in openSUSE-12.2 installation. After deleting those six software packages in Software Management and while online searching for packages of those same names, they were not found in openSUSE-12.3 repositories. Again while online and in Software Management a search was performed for packages with "texlive" just in their names. Many of them were found. Then with some overlap with the instructions kindly provided in this thread by John Hudson, in the left-hand portion of Software Management the "Package" menu was selected, followed by "All in This List" and then "Update unconditionally." I did the same thing in a search for packages with "latex" just in their names. I clicked on the "button" labeled "Accept" and accepted the changes in various packages by clicking on a "Continue" "button." A total of 790 software packages were updated unconditionally or installed in this way. The puzzle for me is why some new packages were being installed to make the number of packages being installed total 790 instead of 221 (Actually in my first attempt in a similar sort of procedure there were 221 software packages being updated unconditionally. But I had to abort the total of all of those installations because the university-branch facility I was using would be closing to the public for the evening before those installations could all be completed. I can access the Internet from my installation of openSUSE 12.3 in a free way using a fast Internet service in a friend's home, a public library, or a branch of a university.). Nevertheless I proceeded with the unconditional updates and installations of the total of 790 software packages.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,450

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    I've always assumed that converting maths to images was standard in latex2html; I've just tried it on a document with a lot maths in it and got 31 images for the maths. So I cannot help you any further with that.

    The reason why you ended up with more packages than you may have started with is that, in the OBS, TeXLive 2013 was structured into package groups; so, even if you only want one package from a group, you still get the whole group.

  9. #9

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    Thanks again, John Hudson, for writing something here. Please state your conditions for your result using LaTeX2HTML to make 31 images, including your installed versions of openSUSE, TeX Live, and LaTeX2HTML and whether or not you had successful images for fractions in the HyperText Markup Language (.html) output file of LaTeX2HTML for your mathematics. So far I have not used TeX Live 2013 and am currently using portions of TeX Live 2012. By OBS do you mean the openSUSE Build Service? Do you think your explanation for a whole group of packages being installed when only one of them in that group would be selected to be installed would apply to TeX Live 2012 in openSUSE 12.3? And again thanks for kindly taking some time to write something here, John Hudson.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    3,450

    Default Re: In openSUSE 12.3: TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2HTML removal? TeX Live 2013 install.? TeX Live 2012+LaTeX2

    My whole installation is from the OBS (www.software.opensuse.org) and so is the 2012 version of TeXLive; I simply selected the latex2html option from within LyX; the images are only perceptible in HTML if you move the cursor over them and it changes to show they are images rather than text; but someone who did not know they were images could be fooled into thinking they were text until they tried to copy and paste them.

    This is the code generated by the program to illustrate a display as opposed to an inline formula in which you can see the link to the image.
    Code:
    whereas the same expression in display mode<center class="par-math-display" >
    <img src="LyX_2_the_ultimate_document_software13x.png" alt="&#x2211;ni=1" class="par-math-display" ></center>
    <!--l. 1057--><p class="nopar" >
    <!--l. 1060--><p class="noindent" >shows the sub- and superscripts in the correct positions
    This is the sum example on page 19 of http://bradlug.co.uk/wp-content/uplo...t_software.pdf


    The way in which TeXLive is packaged into groups was changed for the 2012 version and is quite different from the way it was packaged for previous releases. 12.3 is the first version which saw this change as the default though 12.2 users could use the new packages if they chose to.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •