[tex-live] installation with network troubles

[Hartmut Henkel]

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009, Karl Berry wrote:

>     when a TL2009 package is temporarily broken
>     (missing file --- some newcomer)
>
> What?  Can you give me an example?

no, not now, as it currently and since quite a while (last problems were
maybe 1 or 2 weeks ago) installs fine, just checked, all packages run
through ok. maybe it's more sensitive here as i always do "svn co" and
then a pristine full re-install via non-gui install.tl after moving the
previous 2009 dir away (install takes approx. 10 minutes). Don't laugh,
but i have never done the update in any other, more comfortable way (it
just runs in a terminal, fine). When something was broken (so it
looked), a few hours or a day later after an "svn co" it installed ok
again, and i guessed it's since somebody had added a missing file to
some package.

> The tlpdb in tlnet should always be consistent with the actual files
> in tlnet (this is not true for svn). We have numerous consistency
> checks to ensure this.

when it ever happens again, i send you the log.

>         open (IN, $infile) || return; # die "open($infile) failed: $!";
>     (as i wasn't capable to write Perl code for at least a warning there).
>
> Replace `return' with `{ warn "..."; return; }', seems to me.

thanks, yes, i tried this, e. g.

    open (IN, $infile) || { warn "open($infile) failed"; return; }

but this gives lots of

"my" variable @files masks earlier declaration in same scope at tlpkg/TeXLive/TLUtils.pm line 876.
"state" variable @_ masks earlier declaration in same scope at tlpkg/TeXLive/TLUtils.pm line 876.

then i gave up and did it the simple way.

> Or use an if.
>
>     No idea if such should be converted into a user flag.
>
> It shouldn't be a flag, the data (and the behavior) should be correct
> in the first place.  Perhaps that means we should do the above, to be
> more robust.

Regards, Hartmut