Re: ConTeXt no longer available on Cygwin

Re: ConTeXt no longer available on Cygwin

[Ken Brown]

[This is a follow-up to 
https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2023-March/253326.html, on the 
cygwin list.]

On 3/24/2023 11:00 AM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote:
> On 3/22/2023 12:56 PM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote:
>> As I mentioned in the announcement of TeX Live 2023, there has been a 
>> major change in ConTeXt; see
>>
>>    https://tug.org/texlive/bugs.html
>>
>> Briefly, ConTeXt development has been moved out of TeX Live into a 
>> separate project.  Unfortunately, the maintainer of that project 
>> decided to remove Cygwin support, so I cannot easily provide a context 
>> binary. One Cygwin user of ConTeXt complained upstream, to no avail.
>>
>> At some point I will probably remove the texlive-collection-context 
>> package, which is now useless.  But I am waiting to see how other 
>> distros are going to deal with this change.
>>
>> If you will be greatly inconvenienced by the absence of a context 
>> binary, please let me know by replying to this message.  There may or 
>> may not be anything I can do about it.
> 
> This turned out to be simple to fix.  I will do that shortly, but first 
> I want to finish discussing this with TeX Live maintainers for other 
> distros.

This turns out to be a complete mess, with no uniformity among 
maintainers, so I'm on my own.  The simplest way for me to handle it is 
to package the missing binary as part of texlive-collection-context.(*) 
This presumably means that the latter can no longer be a noarch package. 
  Jon, can you (or calm) cope with a package changing from  noarch to 
x86_64?  Alternatively, I could make a completely new package, say 
texlive-context-bin, which contains only the binary, if you think that's 
better.

Ken

(*) It used to be contained in the texlive package, but the sources are 
no longer in the texlive source tree, and the build system is completely 
different.

Re: ConTeXt no longer available on Cygwin

[Marco Atzeri]

On 14.04.2023 00:25, Ken Brown via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> [This is a follow-up to 
> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2023-March/253326.html, on the 
> cygwin list.]
> 
> On 3/24/2023 11:00 AM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote:
>> On 3/22/2023 12:56 PM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote:
>>> As I mentioned in the announcement of TeX Live 2023, there has been a 
>>> major change in ConTeXt; see
>>>
>>>    https://tug.org/texlive/bugs.html
>>>
>>> Briefly, ConTeXt development has been moved out of TeX Live into a 
>>> separate project.  Unfortunately, the maintainer of that project 
>>> decided to remove Cygwin support, so I cannot easily provide a 
>>> context binary. One Cygwin user of ConTeXt complained upstream, to no 
>>> avail.
>>>
>>> At some point I will probably remove the texlive-collection-context 
>>> package, which is now useless.  But I am waiting to see how other 
>>> distros are going to deal with this change.
>>>
>>> If you will be greatly inconvenienced by the absence of a context 
>>> binary, please let me know by replying to this message.  There may or 
>>> may not be anything I can do about it.
>>
>> This turned out to be simple to fix.  I will do that shortly, but 
>> first I want to finish discussing this with TeX Live maintainers for 
>> other distros.
> 
> This turns out to be a complete mess, with no uniformity among 
> maintainers, so I'm on my own.  The simplest way for me to handle it is 
> to package the missing binary as part of texlive-collection-context.(*) 
> This presumably means that the latter can no longer be a noarch package. 
>   Jon, can you (or calm) cope with a package changing from  noarch to 
> x86_64?  Alternatively, I could make a completely new package, say 
> texlive-context-bin, which contains only the binary, if you think that's 
> better.
> 

It require a manual intervenction on the repository but
we have done it in the past in both directions.

> Ken
> 
> (*) It used to be contained in the texlive package, but the sources are 
> no longer in the texlive source tree, and the build system is completely 
> different.

Re: ConTeXt no longer available on Cygwin

[Jon Turney]

On 14/04/2023 10:13, Marco Atzeri via Cygwin-apps wrote:
> On 14.04.2023 00:25, Ken Brown via Cygwin-apps wrote:
>> [This is a follow-up to 
>> https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/2023-March/253326.html, on the 
>> cygwin list.]
>>
>> On 3/24/2023 11:00 AM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote:
>>> On 3/22/2023 12:56 PM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote:
>>>> As I mentioned in the announcement of TeX Live 2023, there has been 
>>>> a major change in ConTeXt; see
>>>>
>>>>    https://tug.org/texlive/bugs.html
>>>>
>>>> Briefly, ConTeXt development has been moved out of TeX Live into a 
>>>> separate project.  Unfortunately, the maintainer of that project 
>>>> decided to remove Cygwin support, so I cannot easily provide a 
>>>> context binary. One Cygwin user of ConTeXt complained upstream, to 
>>>> no avail.
>>>>
>>>> At some point I will probably remove the texlive-collection-context 
>>>> package, which is now useless.  But I am waiting to see how other 
>>>> distros are going to deal with this change.
>>>>
>>>> If you will be greatly inconvenienced by the absence of a context 
>>>> binary, please let me know by replying to this message.  There may 
>>>> or may not be anything I can do about it.
>>>
>>> This turned out to be simple to fix.  I will do that shortly, but 
>>> first I want to finish discussing this with TeX Live maintainers for 
>>> other distros.
>>
>> This turns out to be a complete mess, with no uniformity among 
>> maintainers, so I'm on my own.  The simplest way for me to handle it 
>> is to package the missing binary as part of 
>> texlive-collection-context.(*) This presumably means that the latter 
>> can no longer be a noarch package.   Jon, can you (or calm) cope with 
>> a package changing from  noarch to x86_64?  Alternatively, I could 
>> make a completely new package, say texlive-context-bin, which contains 
>> only the binary, if you think that's better.
>>
> 
> It require a manual intervention on the repository but
> we have done it in the past in both directions.

Whilst a manual intervention was required in the past, this is no longer 
the case.

[1] https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-apps/2019-June/039614.html