Bug 1951246

Created attachment 1773418 [details]
build.log

file build.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes

Created attachment 1773419 [details]
root.log

file root.log too big, will only attach last 32768 bytes

Created attachment 1773420 [details]
state.log

Hi @Than,

could you please take a look. It seems that the reason for the failure is:

~~~
LaTeX Error: File `xpatch.sty' not found.
~~~

This works on Fedora and there is also:

~~~
$ sudo dnf repoquery -q --disablerepo=* --enablerepo=rawhide --whatprovides 'tex(xpatch.sty)'
texlive-xpatch-9:svn54563-38.fc35.noarch
~~~

which does not seems to be case on RHEL9. As far as I can tell, there is missing `Source5716: https://ctan.math.illinois.edu/systems/texlive/tlnet/archive/xpatch.tar.xz` in RHEL9. Is this intentional?

There is actually this [1] commit in RHEL8, which disabled most of the test cases. However, I am not sure how I figured this out that time ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



[1] https://src.osci.redhat.com/rpms/rubygem-kramdown/c/ddb73473b8448da4ed559d5763bc8bba9aa0c057?branch=rhel-8.5.0

Hi Vit,

sure, it seems we need to add xpatch.sty in texlive, i will have a look at this.

@Than any estimate when you could have some cycles to work on this? I don't want to put pressure on you, I am just asking because I'm still considering to just disable the specific test cases to unblock other work such as package removal from RHEL9 + git-lfs update, etc. I don't think this functionality would be essential for Kramdown.

Hi Vit,

i don't like to include xpatch.sty in texlive because it makes texlive bigger. Our goal for RHEL9 is to keep the texlive package as small as possible.

I have looked at the FTBFS place, it only happens when testing. I will suggest to disable this test.

Would the suggestion be acceptable to you?

Thanks!

(In reply to Than Ngo from comment #7)
> Hi Vit,
> 
> i don't like to include xpatch.sty in texlive because it makes texlive
> bigger. Our goal for RHEL9 is to keep the texlive package as small as
> possible.
> 
> I have looked at the FTBFS place, it only happens when testing. I will
> suggest to disable this test.
> 
> Would the suggestion be acceptable to you?

I am fine with disabling the test cases. It will look similar to RHEL8. I'll refer to this ticket, so next time we don't need to re-evaluate ;)

Thx for looking into this.

@Than: actually, digging a bit deeper, I wonder if you are sure xpatch.sty can be omitted. It seems that the dependency chain is:

scrartcl.cls > xpatch.sty if (amsthm.sty is used)

Given that scrartcl.cls and amsthm.sty are shipped, they can also be used by other users then just Kramdown test suite. I just want to doublecheck that the possible breakage is expected.

Just FTR, this is short reproducer:

~~~
$ cat << EOF | latex
\documentclass{scrartcl}
\usepackage{amsthm}
\begin{document}
\end{document}
EOF
~~~

(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #10)
I have created bug 1960650 to track this separately in the texlive context and moved forward with the rubygem-kramdown:

https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/rubygem-kramdown/-/merge_requests/1

*** Bug 1957342 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 1915908 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***