Sam Kuper | 1 Oct 06:03 2011
Picon

MacTex vs MacPorts

Dear all,

This thread was prompted by another thread I started recently, which
has since been resolved:
http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/2011-September/025653.html

I installed MacTex a couple of years ago, and although I'm not
currently using LaTeX for anything, I may want or need to use it again
in the future.

MacTex has the advantage that it bundles everything needed for using
LaTeX on the Mac, including several handy GUI applications (BibDesk,
LaTeXiT, TeXShop, TeXworks, TeX Live Utility, and Excalibur), and
provides versions of each of these components that should be
compatible with each other. (Only two of those six GUI applications,
incidentally, seem to be available from MacPorts: LaTeXiT and
TeXShop.)

However, MacTex has the disadvantage that it sits outside of any more
general package management system (e.g. MacPorts), which has the
following ramifications, IIUC:

(1) it bundles utilities that may already be present on the user's Mac;
(2) if any of the utilities it bundles *are* present elsewhere on the
user's Mac, then the user is forced to decide which version to give
precedence to in the $PATH variable or other settings, and problems
may arise if other software installed on the Mac expects whichever
versions of those utilities that have *not* been given precedence in
the $PATH;
(3) its components can't be upgraded with a simple package manager
(Continue reading)

Scott Webster | 1 Oct 06:11 2011
Picon

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts

I don't claim to have all the answers, but recently when I had to
compile a "new" latex document I got from a colleague I found that it
was not compatible with the macports versions.  So I installed
MacTex2011.  It has a great prefpane to let you switch which tex
distribution you want to have active (macports/mactex etc.).  You can
also choose exactly what you want to install when you install it.  So
I chose not to install ghostscript for instance, because I already had
it via macports.

I'm writing off my memory so hopefully I'm not too wrong, but in
general it seems they can coexist reasonably well.  If I only needed a
few latex things I would probably just use macports, but I'm writing a
thesis in latex right now and find the selection in MacTex helpful.
In your case you might want to wipe out your (likely obsolete) MacTex
and then only install the newer one if you need it... and when you do,
customize the install to not interfere with macports.

Anyway, just my 2 cents,

Scott

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Sam Kuper <sam.kuper <at> uclmail.net> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> This thread was prompted by another thread I started recently, which
> has since been resolved:
> http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/2011-September/025653.html
>
> I installed MacTex a couple of years ago, and although I'm not
> currently using LaTeX for anything, I may want or need to use it again
(Continue reading)

Sam Kuper | 28 Jun 19:03 2012
Picon

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts

On 1 October 2011 05:11, Scott Webster <sewebster <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't claim to have all the answers, but recently when I had to
> compile a "new" latex document I got from a colleague I found that it
> was not compatible with the macports versions.  So I installed
> MacTex2011.  It has a great prefpane to let you switch which tex
> distribution you want to have active (macports/mactex etc.).  You can
> also choose exactly what you want to install when you install it.  So
> I chose not to install ghostscript for instance, because I already had
> it via macports.
>
> I'm writing off my memory so hopefully I'm not too wrong, but in
> general it seems they can coexist reasonably well.  If I only needed a
> few latex things I would probably just use macports, but I'm writing a
> thesis in latex right now and find the selection in MacTex helpful.
> In your case you might want to wipe out your (likely obsolete) MacTex
> and then only install the newer one if you need it... and when you do,
> customize the install to not interfere with macports.

A very belated reply, but many thanks to you and others who answered my query.

I got rid of the old version of MacTex I had installed, and in the
process I became unimpressed with the uninstallation procedure MacTex
provides.

For the time being I'm going to see how I get on with the default
Macports TexLive installation plus whichever MacPorts packages the
page at https://trac.macports.org/wiki/TeXLivePackages tells me are
necessary for the TeX packages I want.

Regards,
(Continue reading)

Richard L. Hamilton | 1 Oct 06:34 2011
Picon

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts

Unless disk space is tight, or theres the potential for path confusion that couldnt be trivially avoided if
one had both, I'd ask which had the best record of staying reliable and up-to-date.

And not everyone wants to wait however long it takes for all the TeX stuff and its dependencies to build or
even update from source.  Not to mention that since MacPorts seems not always to be fully _tested_ in most
reasonable combinations of ports and options (and some ports are outright mutually exclusive,
including a few that probably don't have to be), I can see how some folks might just want to do a single
download and install of binaries.

Although I think I'd want LyX too somehow, if I were into the whole TeX world that much, unless one of those
other GUI apps is something similar but better (I don't recognize most of them).  I mean, way before TeX, I
could use troff macros, or even write new macros, if I really wanted to, but mostly I don't want to bother
anymore…so probably I'd want a decent GUI editor too.

I imagine that if all the components were in MacPorts, it would be easy enough to have a meta-port that just
existed to give single name to cause all the rest to be installed.

On Oct 1, 2011, at 12:03 AM, Sam Kuper wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> This thread was prompted by another thread I started recently, which
> has since been resolved:
> http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/2011-September/025653.html
> 
> I installed MacTex a couple of years ago, and although I'm not
> currently using LaTeX for anything, I may want or need to use it again
> in the future.
> 
> MacTex has the advantage that it bundles everything needed for using
(Continue reading)

Scott Webster | 1 Oct 06:54 2011
Picon

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Richard L. Hamilton <rlhamil <at> smart.net> wrote:
> I imagine that if all the components were in MacPorts, it would be easy enough to have a meta-port that just
existed to give single name to cause all the rest to be installed.
>

Probably if you install texlive+full you get a lot of stuff :)  I
didn't test this in my particular case.  Perhaps it would have solved
my issues.

Scott
Mark Anderson | 1 Oct 07:05 2011
Picon

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts

I've been meaning to make a BibDesk port for a while now. I don't recognize the others. Otherwise, MacPorts is pretty up to date. Especially if you install texlive+full

Mark

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Scott Webster <sewebster <at> gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Richard L. Hamilton <rlhamil <at> smart.net> wrote:
> I imagine that if all the components were in MacPorts, it would be easy enough to have a meta-port that just existed to give single name to cause all the rest to be installed.
>

Probably if you install texlive+full you get a lot of stuff :)  I
didn't test this in my particular case.  Perhaps it would have solved
my issues.

Scott
_______________________________________________
macports-users mailing list
macports-users <at> lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users

<div>
<p>I've been meaning to make a BibDesk port for a while now. I don't recognize the others. Otherwise, MacPorts is pretty up to date. Especially if you install texlive+full<br><br>Mark<br><br></p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Scott Webster <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:sewebster <at> gmail.com">sewebster <at> gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div class="im">On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Richard L. Hamilton &lt;<a href="mailto:rlhamil <at> smart.net">rlhamil <at> smart.net</a>&gt; wrote:<br>

&gt; I imagine that if all the components were in MacPorts, it would be easy enough to have a meta-port that just existed to give single name to cause all the rest to be installed.<br>
&gt;<br><br>
</div>Probably if you install texlive+full you get a lot of stuff :) &nbsp;I<br>
didn't test this in my particular case. &nbsp;Perhaps it would have solved<br>
my issues.<br><br>
Scott<br><div>
<div></div>
<div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
macports-users mailing list<br><a href="mailto:macports-users <at> lists.macosforge.org">macports-users <at> lists.macosforge.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users" target="_blank">http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
Dan Ports | 1 Oct 10:03 2011

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts

MacTeX and MacPorts are, for the most part, going to install the same
version of the same TeX Live software, so it largely comes down to
which package manager you'd like to use.

The major differences are:
 - MacTeX includes the entire distribution (which makes it pretty
   large). The texlive metaport, by default, installs the most commonly
   used packages. The others can be installed from separate ports, or
   by installing texlive +full

 - MacTeX includes its own package manager that can install pre-release
   versions. Our texlive ports install the latest release version, and
   mostly only get bug-fix updates between releases.

 - if you install via MacPorts, MacPorts can keep track of your
   installation. Besides meaning you can update your TeX installation
   the same way you update your other ports, it also means that it can
   be used to satisfy dependencies for other ports. It can also install
   additional texlive packages as needed for dependencies.

In years past, our texlive ports were sometimes significantly out of
date. That's not really an issue nowadays; TeX Live 2011 was available
in ports a week or so after its release.

Dan

--

-- 
Dan R. K. Ports              MIT CSAIL                http://drkp.net/
Keith J. Schultz | 1 Oct 11:04 2011
Picon

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts

Hi All, Sam,

I a little something as a important side note.

MacTeX does work well with Macports. You have to change the config-file
of MacPorts to look for the existence of the MacTeX binaries. Sorry, I can not 
remember which. Of course It may not work anymore.

At least I am happy with MacTeX.

regards
	Keith.

Am 01.10.2011 um 10:03 schrieb Dan Ports:

> MacTeX and MacPorts are, for the most part, going to install the same
> version of the same TeX Live software, so it largely comes down to
> which package manager you'd like to use.
> 
> The major differences are:
> - MacTeX includes the entire distribution (which makes it pretty
>   large). The texlive metaport, by default, installs the most commonly
>   used packages. The others can be installed from separate ports, or
>   by installing texlive +full
> 
> - MacTeX includes its own package manager that can install pre-release
>   versions. Our texlive ports install the latest release version, and
>   mostly only get bug-fix updates between releases.
> 
> - if you install via MacPorts, MacPorts can keep track of your
>   installation. Besides meaning you can update your TeX installation
>   the same way you update your other ports, it also means that it can
>   be used to satisfy dependencies for other ports. It can also install
>   additional texlive packages as needed for dependencies.
> 
> In years past, our texlive ports were sometimes significantly out of
> date. That's not really an issue nowadays; TeX Live 2011 was available
> in ports a week or so after its release.
> 
> Dan
> 
> -- 
> Dan R. K. Ports              MIT CSAIL                http://drkp.net/
> _______________________________________________
> macports-users mailing list
> macports-users <at> lists.macosforge.org
> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users

Sam Kuper | 1 Oct 14:53 2011
Picon

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts

On 1 October 2011 10:04, Keith J. Schultz <keithjschultz <at> web.de> wrote:
> (Snip)
> MacTeX does work well with Macports. You have to change the config-file
> of MacPorts to look for the existence of the MacTeX binaries. Sorry, I can not
> remember which. Of course It may not work anymore.
>
> At least I am happy with MacTeX.

Thanks Keith. Is the change you referred to described here:
http://www.tug.org/mactex/multipletexdistributions.html ? Or did you
find that a different change worked better?

Thanks again,

Sam
Ryan Schmidt | 2 Oct 00:47 2011

Re: MacTex vs MacPorts


On Oct 1, 2011, at 07:53, Sam Kuper wrote:

> On 1 October 2011 10:04, Keith J. Schultz <keithjschultz <at> web.de> wrote:
>> (Snip)
>> MacTeX does work well with Macports. You have to change the config-file
>> of MacPorts to look for the existence of the MacTeX binaries. Sorry, I can not
>> remember which. Of course It may not work anymore.
>> 
>> At least I am happy with MacTeX.
> 
> Thanks Keith. Is the change you referred to described here:
> http://www.tug.org/mactex/multipletexdistributions.html ? Or did you
> find that a different change worked better?

If you want MacTex software to be able to satisfy MacPorts TeX dependencies, you can add /usr/texbin to
binpath in macports.conf. Otherwise if you install ports that require TeX, they'll install the
requisite MacPorts TeX ports.


Gmane