LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

[meedstrom]

According to https://ctan.org/pkg/grffile, since 2019-11-08, grffile is a stub that just loads graphicx, part of texlive-latex-graphics, part of texlive-base.  My system (Guix) doesn't have a package for grffile, so I can't generate a PDF, which is silly because it's a stub anyway.

Suggest fixing by removing \usepackage{grffile} in LaTeX export.

A caveat: some distributions seem to still package an old TeXLive full distribution, going by Guix which provides a three-gigabyte "texlive" package from 2019-04-10.  I'm not sure what sort of deprecation time we allow.

Martin Edström

Re: LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

[Timothy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 613 bytes --]

meedstrom@teknik.io writes:

> According to <https://ctan.org/pkg/grffile>, since 2019-11-08, grffile is a stub
> that just loads graphicx, part of texlive-latex-graphics, part of texlive-base.
> My system (Guix) doesn’t have a package for grffile, so I can’t generate a PDF,
> which is silly because it’s a stub anyway.

Oh, that reminds me, we can also get rid of texcomp.
<https://tecosaur.github.io/emacs-config/config.html#reduce-default-packages>

I’ve had this in my config for a while, but I’ve done so much to the LaTeX
export that I forgot about it 😛.

All the best,
Timothy

Re: LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

[Bastien]

Timothy <tecosaur@gmail.com> writes:

> meedstrom@teknik.io writes:
>
>> According to <https://ctan.org/pkg/grffile>, since 2019-11-08, grffile is a stub
>> that just loads graphicx, part of texlive-latex-graphics, part of texlive-base.
>> My system (Guix) doesn’t have a package for grffile, so I can’t generate a PDF,
>> which is silly because it’s a stub anyway.
>
> Oh, that reminds me, we can also get rid of texcomp.
> <https://tecosaur.github.io/emacs-config/config.html#reduce-default-packages>

Patch welcome :)

-- 
 Bastien

Re: LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

[Timothy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 139 bytes --]

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Patch welcome :)

Well, it’s a small thing so I whipped up a patch 🙂.

All the best,
Timothy

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-org-Remove-obsolete-default-LaTeX-packages.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2659 bytes --]

From 9728ad2fc166cb6d15df9ff4b2179680a2100f1b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: TEC <tec@tecosaur.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 00:27:33 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] org: Remove obsolete default LaTeX packages

* lisp/org.el (org-latex-default-packages-alist): Remove grffile and
textcomp from the list of default LaTeX packages to load, as they've
been obsolete for quite a few years now.

* etc/ORG-NEWS: Announce the removal of grffile and textcomp from
`org-latex-default-packages-alist'.
---
 etc/ORG-NEWS | 6 ++++++
 lisp/org.el  | 9 +++------
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/etc/ORG-NEWS b/etc/ORG-NEWS
index 9d19a812c..42a142474 100644
--- a/etc/ORG-NEWS
+++ b/etc/ORG-NEWS
@@ -528,6 +528,12 @@ for each parameter and use more readable expression in bookmarklet:
       url: location.href, title: document.title})
 #+end_example
 
+*** Remove obsolete LaTeX packages from ~org-latex-default-packages-alist~
+
+The LaTeX packages =grffile= and =textcomp= are redundant, with their
+capabilities being merged into =graphicx= and the LaTeX core
+respectively a while ago.
+
 * Version 9.4
 ** Incompatible changes
 *** Possibly broken internal file links: please check and fix
diff --git a/lisp/org.el b/lisp/org.el
index 4c681eb4d..a02a1fdf2 100644
--- a/lisp/org.el
+++ b/lisp/org.el
@@ -3467,13 +3467,11 @@ (defcustom org-latex-default-packages-alist
   '(("AUTO" "inputenc"  t ("pdflatex"))
     ("T1"   "fontenc"   t ("pdflatex"))
     (""     "graphicx"  t)
-    (""     "grffile"   t)
     (""     "longtable" nil)
     (""     "wrapfig"   nil)
     (""     "rotating"  nil)
     ("normalem" "ulem"  t)
     (""     "amsmath"   t)
-    (""     "textcomp"  t)
     (""     "amssymb"   t)
     (""     "capt-of"   nil)
     (""     "hyperref"  nil))
@@ -3487,15 +3485,14 @@ (defcustom org-latex-default-packages-alist
 
 - inputenc, fontenc:  for basic font and character selection
 - graphicx: for including images
-- grffile: allow periods and spaces in graphics file names
 - longtable: For multipage tables
 - wrapfig: for figure placement
 - rotating: for sideways figures and tables
 - ulem: for underline and strike-through
 - amsmath: for subscript and superscript and math environments
-- textcomp, amssymb: for various symbols used
-  for interpreting the entities in `org-entities'.  You can skip
-  some of these packages if you don't use any of their symbols.
+- amssymb: for various symbols used for interpreting the entities
+  in `org-entities'.  You can skip some of this package if you don't
+  use any of the symbols.
 - capt-of: for captions outside of floats
 - hyperref: for cross references
 
-- 
2.33.0

Re: LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

[Bastien]

Timothy <tecosaur@gmail.com> writes:

> Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Patch welcome :)
>
> Well, it’s a small thing so I whipped up a patch 🙂.

Applied, thanks!

-- 
 Bastien

Re: LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

[Stefan Nobis]

Timothy <tecosaur@gmail.com> writes:

> meedstrom@teknik.io writes:

> Oh, that reminds me, we can also get rid of texcomp.
> <https://tecosaur.github.io/emacs-config/config.html#reduce-default-packages>

Hmmm... one note about xcolor in your list: Some configuration options
are load-time options that have to be set as package load options. If
xcolor is already loaded with no options, its much harder to load it
with special options like [table,svgnames*]. Also some classes like
beamer are very special with reagads to xcolor.

But what about some other tweaks?

To better support lualatex and xelatex in the default configuration,
we should add

    ("" "fontspec" t ("lualatex" "xelatex"))

Personally, I would also add the following two lines for better
multilingual support with all three engines:

    ("AUTO,safe=none,math=normal" "babel" t ("pdflatex" "lualatex"))
    ("AUTO" "polyglossia" t ("xelatex"))

Then, for math it may be nice to substitute "amsmath" with "mathtools"
and for lualatex and xelatex add something like this:

    ("warnings-off={mathtools-colon,mathtools-overbracket}" "unicode-math" t ("lualatex" "xelatex"))

What do you think?

-- 
Until the next mail...,
Stefan.

Re: LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

[Max Nikulin]

On 27/09/2021 19:07, meedstrom@teknik.io wrote:
> According to https://ctan.org/pkg/grffile, since 2019-11-08, grffile is a stub that just loads graphicx, part of texlive-latex-graphics, part of texlive-base.  My system (Guix) doesn't have a package for grffile, so I can't generate a PDF, which is silly because it's a stub anyway.
> 
> Suggest fixing by removing \usepackage{grffile} in LaTeX export.
> 
> A caveat: some distributions seem to still package an old TeXLive full distribution, going by Guix which provides a three-gigabyte "texlive" package from 2019-04-10.  I'm not sure what sort of deprecation time we allow.

Perhaps it can be tested in runtime by

     kpsewhich grffile.sty

Re: LaTeX export: grffile is a stub package

[Juan Manuel Macías]

Hi,

meedstrom@teknik.io writes:

> According to https://ctan.org/pkg/grffile, since 2019-11-08, grffile
> is a stub that just loads graphicx, part of texlive-latex-graphics,
> part of texlive-base. My system (Guix) doesn't have a package for
> grffile, so I can't generate a PDF, which is silly because it's a stub
> anyway.
>
> Suggest fixing by removing \usepackage{grffile} in LaTeX export.
>
> A caveat: some distributions seem to still package an old TeXLive full
> distribution, going by Guix which provides a three-gigabyte "texlive"
> package from 2019-04-10. I'm not sure what sort of deprecation time we
> allow.

grffile is a deprecated LaTeX package, but it is included in TeX live
2021 (Arch). The Arch version of TeXlive is identical to the official
version (except that it does not include the documentation, which must
be installed using an AUR package). My recommendation: unless you are in
Arch or one of its derivatives, it is better to always install *the
official and lastest version* of TeX live (with its own installer and
its own package manager); the versions included in the repositories of
many distros (except for Arch and very few others) are usually outdated
or incomplete, and it is better to avoid them. The current version of
TeXlive is TeXlive 2021. There is, by tradition, a version per year and
in each one many things are modified and quite bugs fixed.

Best regards,

Juan Manuel