There seems to be a tectonic jll package. Would it be better to use it directly?

[Krastanov]

First of all, thanks for having set up all of this! It saved me a ton of headaches in creating https://github.com/Krastanov/Quantikz

As I was looking up more details about this package on juliahub, I stumbled upon https://github.com/JuliaBinaryWrappers/tectonic_jll.jl (Is this something you have done? I can not find the author of this jll package)

Could you consider using that package instead of the artefacts you already have? The main reason I am hoping for this is that the jll package supports more architectures and is (supposedly) much easier to update/recompile/target another system.

[Krastanov]

Found the author (https://github.com/JuliaPackaging/Yggdrasil/tree/master/T/tectonic) and I guess it is indeed you. I apologize for the cluelessness. Will the jll package be a functional alternative to the current artifacts in the near future?

[MichaelHatherly]

It saved me a ton of headaches in creating https://github.com/Krastanov/Quantikz

Nice package! Glad this has helped.

Yes, indeed, I did put together the jll wrapper. There's a number of outstanding issues trying to get most architectures building successfully with BinaryBuilder though, and so it's been simpler to just repackage the official binaries for now. I agree though that it would be great to support as many archs as possible, and that's the eventual plan, but the complexity of the tectonic build process has remained an issue each time we have another look into it.

[ViralBShah]

Seems to have pretty good arch coverage already. The only major missing one seems to be the M1 Mac support.

[fkastner]

The jll also seems to be more regularly updated. The jll package ships v0.12.0 while this package is still at v0.8.0.