MiKTeX updates packages only partiallyWhat is the preferable setup for MiKTeX to keep all packages up-to-date...
New order #4: World
What does 'script /dev/null' do?
Are cabin dividers used to "hide" the flex of the airplane?
How to manage monthly salary
Patience, young "Padovan"
Why is the design of haulage companies so “special”?
"listening to me about as much as you're listening to this pole here"
LWC and complex parameters
Add an angle to a sphere
Can I find out the caloric content of bread by dehydrating it?
Domain expired, GoDaddy holds it and is asking more money
Can I legally use front facing blue light in the UK?
Crop image to path created in TikZ?
How to answer pointed "are you quitting" questioning when I don't want them to suspect
Is there a name of the flying bionic bird?
How did the USSR manage to innovate in an environment characterized by government censorship and high bureaucracy?
Hosting Wordpress in a EC2 Load Balanced Instance
How can I fix this gap between bookcases I made?
Was there ever an axiom rendered a theorem?
Shall I use personal or official e-mail account when registering to external websites for work purpose?
What do you call something that goes against the spirit of the law, but is legal when interpreting the law to the letter?
Landlord wants to switch my lease to a "Land contract" to "get back at the city"
Is it wise to focus on putting odd beats on left when playing double bass drums?
What happens when a metallic dragon and a chromatic dragon mate?
MiKTeX updates packages only partially
What is the preferable setup for MiKTeX to keep all packages up-to-date easily?7-2012 l3kernel & l3packages updates | 'broken'?Temp file fails verification every time I try to update MiKTeXmiktex-xetex issue in MiKTex 2.9 portableUpdating packages in MikTeXmiktex with pdfpages - first page repeated instead of actual pages of original pdfMikTex 2.9 portable (Windows) / pdflatex - No hyphenation patterns were preloadedMikTeX installation fails with error “Not a file name database file (wrong signature)”MikTeX update from basic install (2.9.6850) fails with fatal errorMikTeX Console stop working
When I requested recently MiKTeX console to update my installation (portable version on Win10) I noticed that not all packages that have been updated in the package database are recognized to be updated. Latest examples are babel, fira, l3kernel. These are not experimental packages, are they? Can somebody confirm that observation?
miktex console
asked 19 hours ago
tfrantfran
31113
|
show 5 more comments
When I requested recently MiKTeX console to update my installation (portable version on Win10) I noticed that not all packages that have been updated in the package database are recognized to be updated. Latest examples are babel, fira, l3kernel. These are not experimental packages, are they? Can somebody confirm that observation?
miktex console
asked 19 hours ago
tfrantfran
31113
2
In the old days MikTeX would give certain system infrastructure packages preferential treatment which meant that one had to run the updater twice to get a fully updated system. I haven't seen that behaviour lately, but I don't know if it is still there. With a normal install there is always the issue of User v Admin mode, but I'm not sure if that is relevant for a portable install. How exactly do you know the packages were supposed to be updated but aren't? Do you maybe have local files not controlled by this MikTeX that have precedence over MikTeX-installed files?
– moewe
19 hours ago
1
MikTeX package repository is not updated everyday, therefore the most recent MikTeX update could not contain the most recent CTAN version of last updated packages. You can see at miktex.org last update date, if desired packages where updated on CTAN later, you'll have to wait for next MikTeX update or install the package yourself..
– Ignasi
18 hours ago
@moewe. I have no local files. I checked the updates via the 'Packages' dialog in MikTeX console. Also after synchronizing the local package database. In this case, the column 'Packaged on' contains dates that is newer the one in column 'Installed on'. Yes, I noticed that during the last 15 days or so I got only binary files as updates. But I'm convinced that I should have got the others meanwhile as well.
– tfran
17 hours ago
1
I can confirm a similar odd set of dates i.e. babel in my case installed last November is not confirmed as updated to match 04/04 package taking a simple example Polyglossia is shown but not confirmed as 06/04/19 the folder is the date I first installed and ALL the contents are now a year old as dated 07/04/18 thus the update was not triggered otherwise I would have accepted
– KJO
15 hours ago
Thanks for confirmation. Is that issue worth to be added to the MiKTeX bug tracker?
– tfran
15 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
When I requested recently MiKTeX console to update my installation (portable version on Win10) I noticed that not all packages that have been updated in the package database are recognized to be updated. Latest examples are babel, fira, l3kernel. These are not experimental packages, are they? Can somebody confirm that observation?
miktex console
asked 19 hours ago
tfrantfran
31113
When I requested recently MiKTeX console to update my installation (portable version on Win10) I noticed that not all packages that have been updated in the package database are recognized to be updated. Latest examples are babel, fira, l3kernel. These are not experimental packages, are they? Can somebody confirm that observation?
miktex console
miktex console
asked 19 hours ago
tfrantfran
31113
asked 19 hours ago
tfrantfran
31113
asked 19 hours ago
tfrantfran
31113
asked 19 hours ago
tfrantfran
31113
asked 19 hours ago
tfrantfran
31113
31113
2
In the old days MikTeX would give certain system infrastructure packages preferential treatment which meant that one had to run the updater twice to get a fully updated system. I haven't seen that behaviour lately, but I don't know if it is still there. With a normal install there is always the issue of User v Admin mode, but I'm not sure if that is relevant for a portable install. How exactly do you know the packages were supposed to be updated but aren't? Do you maybe have local files not controlled by this MikTeX that have precedence over MikTeX-installed files?
– moewe
19 hours ago
1
MikTeX package repository is not updated everyday, therefore the most recent MikTeX update could not contain the most recent CTAN version of last updated packages. You can see at miktex.org last update date, if desired packages where updated on CTAN later, you'll have to wait for next MikTeX update or install the package yourself..
– Ignasi
18 hours ago
@moewe. I have no local files. I checked the updates via the 'Packages' dialog in MikTeX console. Also after synchronizing the local package database. In this case, the column 'Packaged on' contains dates that is newer the one in column 'Installed on'. Yes, I noticed that during the last 15 days or so I got only binary files as updates. But I'm convinced that I should have got the others meanwhile as well.
– tfran
17 hours ago
1
I can confirm a similar odd set of dates i.e. babel in my case installed last November is not confirmed as updated to match 04/04 package taking a simple example Polyglossia is shown but not confirmed as 06/04/19 the folder is the date I first installed and ALL the contents are now a year old as dated 07/04/18 thus the update was not triggered otherwise I would have accepted
– KJO
15 hours ago
Thanks for confirmation. Is that issue worth to be added to the MiKTeX bug tracker?
– tfran
15 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
2
In the old days MikTeX would give certain system infrastructure packages preferential treatment which meant that one had to run the updater twice to get a fully updated system. I haven't seen that behaviour lately, but I don't know if it is still there. With a normal install there is always the issue of User v Admin mode, but I'm not sure if that is relevant for a portable install. How exactly do you know the packages were supposed to be updated but aren't? Do you maybe have local files not controlled by this MikTeX that have precedence over MikTeX-installed files?
– moewe
19 hours ago
1
MikTeX package repository is not updated everyday, therefore the most recent MikTeX update could not contain the most recent CTAN version of last updated packages. You can see at miktex.org last update date, if desired packages where updated on CTAN later, you'll have to wait for next MikTeX update or install the package yourself..
– Ignasi
18 hours ago
@moewe. I have no local files. I checked the updates via the 'Packages' dialog in MikTeX console. Also after synchronizing the local package database. In this case, the column 'Packaged on' contains dates that is newer the one in column 'Installed on'. Yes, I noticed that during the last 15 days or so I got only binary files as updates. But I'm convinced that I should have got the others meanwhile as well.
– tfran
17 hours ago
1
I can confirm a similar odd set of dates i.e. babel in my case installed last November is not confirmed as updated to match 04/04 package taking a simple example Polyglossia is shown but not confirmed as 06/04/19 the folder is the date I first installed and ALL the contents are now a year old as dated 07/04/18 thus the update was not triggered otherwise I would have accepted
– KJO
15 hours ago
Thanks for confirmation. Is that issue worth to be added to the MiKTeX bug tracker?
– tfran
15 hours ago
2
2
In the old days MikTeX would give certain system infrastructure packages preferential treatment which meant that one had to run the updater twice to get a fully updated system. I haven't seen that behaviour lately, but I don't know if it is still there. With a normal install there is always the issue of User v Admin mode, but I'm not sure if that is relevant for a portable install. How exactly do you know the packages were supposed to be updated but aren't? Do you maybe have local files not controlled by this MikTeX that have precedence over MikTeX-installed files?
– moewe
19 hours ago
In the old days MikTeX would give certain system infrastructure packages preferential treatment which meant that one had to run the updater twice to get a fully updated system. I haven't seen that behaviour lately, but I don't know if it is still there. With a normal install there is always the issue of User v Admin mode, but I'm not sure if that is relevant for a portable install. How exactly do you know the packages were supposed to be updated but aren't? Do you maybe have local files not controlled by this MikTeX that have precedence over MikTeX-installed files?
– moewe
19 hours ago
1
1
MikTeX package repository is not updated everyday, therefore the most recent MikTeX update could not contain the most recent CTAN version of last updated packages. You can see at miktex.org last update date, if desired packages where updated on CTAN later, you'll have to wait for next MikTeX update or install the package yourself..
– Ignasi
18 hours ago
MikTeX package repository is not updated everyday, therefore the most recent MikTeX update could not contain the most recent CTAN version of last updated packages. You can see at miktex.org last update date, if desired packages where updated on CTAN later, you'll have to wait for next MikTeX update or install the package yourself..
– Ignasi
18 hours ago
@moewe. I have no local files. I checked the updates via the 'Packages' dialog in MikTeX console. Also after synchronizing the local package database. In this case, the column 'Packaged on' contains dates that is newer the one in column 'Installed on'. Yes, I noticed that during the last 15 days or so I got only binary files as updates. But I'm convinced that I should have got the others meanwhile as well.
– tfran
17 hours ago
@moewe. I have no local files. I checked the updates via the 'Packages' dialog in MikTeX console. Also after synchronizing the local package database. In this case, the column 'Packaged on' contains dates that is newer the one in column 'Installed on'. Yes, I noticed that during the last 15 days or so I got only binary files as updates. But I'm convinced that I should have got the others meanwhile as well.
– tfran
17 hours ago
1
1
I can confirm a similar odd set of dates i.e. babel in my case installed last November is not confirmed as updated to match 04/04 package taking a simple example Polyglossia is shown but not confirmed as 06/04/19 the folder is the date I first installed and ALL the contents are now a year old as dated 07/04/18 thus the update was not triggered otherwise I would have accepted
– KJO
15 hours ago
I can confirm a similar odd set of dates i.e. babel in my case installed last November is not confirmed as updated to match 04/04 package taking a simple example Polyglossia is shown but not confirmed as 06/04/19 the folder is the date I first installed and ALL the contents are now a year old as dated 07/04/18 thus the update was not triggered otherwise I would have accepted
– KJO
15 hours ago
Thanks for confirmation. Is that issue worth to be added to the MiKTeX bug tracker?
– tfran
15 hours ago
Thanks for confirmation. Is that issue worth to be added to the MiKTeX bug tracker?
– tfran
15 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f483748%2fmiktex-updates-packages-only-partially%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f483748%2fmiktex-updates-packages-only-partially%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
In the old days MikTeX would give certain system infrastructure packages preferential treatment which meant that one had to run the updater twice to get a fully updated system. I haven't seen that behaviour lately, but I don't know if it is still there. With a normal install there is always the issue of User v Admin mode, but I'm not sure if that is relevant for a portable install. How exactly do you know the packages were supposed to be updated but aren't? Do you maybe have local files not controlled by this MikTeX that have precedence over MikTeX-installed files?
– moewe
19 hours ago
1
MikTeX package repository is not updated everyday, therefore the most recent MikTeX update could not contain the most recent CTAN version of last updated packages. You can see at miktex.org last update date, if desired packages where updated on CTAN later, you'll have to wait for next MikTeX update or install the package yourself..
– Ignasi
18 hours ago
@moewe. I have no local files. I checked the updates via the 'Packages' dialog in MikTeX console. Also after synchronizing the local package database. In this case, the column 'Packaged on' contains dates that is newer the one in column 'Installed on'. Yes, I noticed that during the last 15 days or so I got only binary files as updates. But I'm convinced that I should have got the others meanwhile as well.
– tfran
17 hours ago
1
I can confirm a similar odd set of dates i.e. babel in my case installed last November is not confirmed as updated to match 04/04 package taking a simple example Polyglossia is shown but not confirmed as 06/04/19 the folder is the date I first installed and ALL the contents are now a year old as dated 07/04/18 thus the update was not triggered otherwise I would have accepted
– KJO
15 hours ago
Thanks for confirmation. Is that issue worth to be added to the MiKTeX bug tracker?
– tfran
15 hours ago