Default option needs 1.8G texlive

I just installed FreeBSD 10.3 AMD64 release candidate, and subsequently used ports to build Linrad (a very small ham program).

The build needed audio/portaudio, which has a dependency on devel/doxygen, which then wanted to build print/texlive-texmf (for which the source tarball is 1.8G).

comms/linrad -> audio/portaudio -> devel/doxygen -> print/tex-formats -> print/texlive-texmf

Normally, Linrad takes two minutes to build. Print/texlive-texmf takes a *long* time to download. Are the options really defaulting to a full texlive-texmf installation, or am I doing something wrong?

Edited 09/10/2016: I must correct the statement made above (about the portaudio dependency). The linrad program is NOT dependent on portaudio.
Last edited:
Why not turn off the doxygen option?

True, I could do that, but a lot of ports want it. Is it really wanting the full TexLive? I guess I could dig through the port files to see...

That 1.8G file always causes a time-out on my connection ...
We really should get subpackages where the -devel and -doc subpackages would be optional but recommended installs. This is basically how it's handled in Debian Linux.
Fortunately, I had a copy of texlive-texmf...tar.xz, left over from my last math/sagemath installation. So, it wasn't so bad for me. But, if this is happening for everyone ... seems not so good.
I think you should set devel/doxygen's LATEX and DOCS options to off.

(Off: I ran similar cases, texlive-texmf is too big and in many cases is useless. One possibility is split texlive-texmf into subpackages but as I know the maintainer, hrs doesn't want)

He definitely wants the them but the subpackages (subports is maybe a better word) are not yet implemented in the ports infrastructure. Note, subpackages is not the same thing as master/slave ports.
Yes, the subports is a better word :)
I saw some year ago in ArchLinux (when I used it): Arch/TeXLive subpackages and if you check the texmf-specific parts (so not the binaries) can see that all packages are individual packages (not "subpackages"): for example texlive-science/PKGBUILD (and they splitted up the 1.xGb texmf-source too).
I think this method (idea) isn't bad practice - at least better than download-extract-package more than 1Gb.
For math/sage, it seems I end up with huge files either way I choose to install it:


  • 1.8G texlive-20150523-texmf.tar.xz
  • 465M sage-6.7.tar.gz

".txz" Packages:

  • 617M texlive-20150523-texmf.txz
  • 1.2G sage-math-6.7.txz

It seems that installing with packages saves about .5G. Either way, these packages are by far the biggest things in FreeBSD ports, AFAIK. Is there anything bigger?

So, yes, I'd be in favor of a breakup.
Some days ago Poudriere got stuck with a fetch/runaway error on print/texlive-texmf. The build of several hundred builds was endangered getting lost as completing the repository failed.

WTF is drawing in this? I did not know, had to enter the build-jail manually for cleaning up.

The culprit was finally identified by adding editors/abiword to a bulk list.

I'm still not willing to accept, that there are intentionally ports on the tree with a size of more than a GB that gets drawn in. I believe that no developer could be that insane to do such a stupidity. Clear words, have to be spoken.

From a security view such events could be used as an attack on the ports tree causing failing to build urgent updates and more.
Some of this might be avoidable by turning off DOCS or DOXYGEN port options.
Or turn off the DOCS and LATEX options in devel/doxygen. I think there are few ports that generate their docs with latex directly. Not exact solution but it shows an approximate number:
$ find /usr/ports/ -name Makefile | xargs grep -w TEX | wc -l
Exactly. That's why for dports I set colord and colord-gtk MANPAGES options to OFF by default. I've been meaning to let kwm@ know in case he wants to do the same for FreeBSD.