TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Are there any problems with placing parts (or all) of texmf-local under Git source control? Git places a hidden directory in the folders it manages. Are there issues caused by doing this; would doing so bother any of the TeX configuration tools.

share|improve this question
no there are no implications. I use that method. – zeroth Mar 24 '12 at 14:29
@zeroth: That sounds like an answer. – raxacoricofallapatorius Mar 25 '12 at 19:19
I tried to elaborate a bit more about what could also be done in another situation. I dont know your intentions of use, so I added a bit :) – zeroth Mar 25 '12 at 20:20
up vote 3 down vote accepted

No there are no implications. I belive the only files that will be searched for by the list generation tool is the files listed in the output of running:

kpsewhich --help, and then look under:
Recognized format names and their (abbreviations) and suffixes:.

None of these are defaulted in the .git folder (unless you add them to your script directory).

And even so it only searches files in certain sub-directories under for example tex.

Even though this does not pose any problem I generally like to have things separated, and have thus created a new folder to which I link by ln down to texmf-local. This enables one to quick-switch between different package versions if this it what you had in mind?

If it is a purely managing package versions on several machines and not real version controlling, what you had in mind is deemed appropriate.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.