Re: [[email protected]: Re: [[email protected]: Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate]]
Hello Thomas, Derek, On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 19:56 +0100, Thomas Esser wrote: > texi2html: a fixed version is available. I plan to add this to > tetex. Please, let me know if this has problems: > https://texi2html.cvshome.org/files/documents/70/709/texi2html-1.74.tar.gz > > Thomas > I can confirm that with texi2html-1.74 I don't see the infinite loop any more while compiling quagga. Derek, thanks for a quick fix! Jindrich -- Jindrich Novy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/
[[email protected]: Re: [[email protected]: Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate]]
texi2html: a fixed version is available. I plan to add this to tetex. Please, let me know if this has problems: https://texi2html.cvshome.org/files/documents/70/709/texi2html-1.74.tar.gz Thomas - Forwarded message from Derek Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:53:39 -0500 From: Derek Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Organization: Get CVS Support from Ximbiot <http://ximbiot.com>! User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Thomas Esser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate] In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-UIDL: iT*"!^:T"!!cd!!W0h!! X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.00 required=0.90 > > >>could you please do a release to have a version for teTex 3.0? >> >> > >Yes, that would be great. > > 1.74 is up. Derek - End forwarded message -
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
Thomas Esser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Wishlist: AUCTeX supports Omega now and it calls executables odvips >> and oxdvi for displaying the respective DVI files. > > Ok, odvips + oxdvi are now back. As links, correct? This is appreciated. Now we just need to get the Omega developers to support Omega, and we are all set... Different story, though. Future versions of Omega according to Yannis are supposed to support other fonts, like Opentype. I don't know whether some odvips is part of those plans. But it is possible that preliminary information regarding the plans for that can be gotten before odvips and oxdvi have existed just as links in stable teTeX, TeXlive and Debian releases for so long that they can be considered established. So we might still decide at one point of time to declare the names "odvips" and "oxdvi" obsolete. For now it will cause AUCTeX fewer headaches if we keep them around. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
> Wishlist: AUCTeX supports Omega now and it calls executables odvips > and oxdvi for displaying the respective DVI files. Ok, odvips + oxdvi are now back. Thomas
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On 2005-01-26 10:41:32 +1300, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > It seems SuSE has a policy to not ship beta if there is a stable, and No. They happily ship mutt betas. Best regards Martin -- Martin Schröder, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ArtCom GmbH, Lise-Meitner-Str 5, 28359 Bremen, Germany Voice +49 421 20419-44 / Fax +49 421 20419-10 http://www.artcom-gmbh.de
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
I haven't been actively working on texi2html recently - my primary
interest is that it generates the CVS manual properly, which 1.72 still
does.
Patrice Dumas has been doing most of the recent work and is usually
quick to respond. I've cc'd him as well as the texi2html development list.
Regards,
Derek
Jindrich Novy wrote:
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 12:09 -0800, Mike Castle wrote:
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 02:05:30PM +0100, Jindrich Novy wrote:
There were serious issues also with the latest stable texi2html-1.72
while compiling quagga. It also hung up in an infinite loop. The lastest
texi2html working for me was 1.66 and I was able to reproduce the
infinite loop issue also with any higher texi2html release.
Damn. :-<
Would it be wise to ship texi2html-1.66 then? Better to ship something old
that works that new that is known to be broken?
It looks like the texi2html-1.68 and later are unable to handle this
construct for example:
@deffn Command {hostname @var{hostname}} {}
...stuff...
@end deffn
It fails at the first line stating:
*** '}' without opening '{' before: ...
Repeating the error message for a long time. The error message isn't
true since all brackets are correctly enclosed.
Thomas, if you like to reproduce it, please download quagga from:
http://quagga.net/download/quagga-0.98.0.tar.gz
and try to compile quagga.texi in the /doc subdirectory.
I agree with Mike it's better to release working 1.66 within teTeX-3.0
instead of buggy latest "stable" release.
Thanks,
Jindrich
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 10:41:32AM +1300, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > > the lastest SUSE (9.2) still ships teTeX 2.0.2 -- so what does this tell us > > about current teTeX pretest ??? ;-)) > > ;-) > > It seems SuSE has a policy to not ship beta if there is a stable, and > there's a lot to be said for that. >... I remember SuSE 8.2 shipping with a prerelease of gcc 3.3 as default compiler... > Volker cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
> the lastest SUSE (9.2) still ships teTeX 2.0.2 -- so what does this tell us > about current teTeX pretest ??? ;-)) ;-) It seems SuSE has a policy to not ship beta if there is a stable, and there's a lot to be said for that. However, the last stable tetex is getting too outdated which also creates problems. Considering that several larger projects (latex, tex-live) work on yearly release cycles, would there be chance tetex could sync with that...?? Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is possibly list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Jan 25, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > > Would it be wise to ship texi2html-1.66 then? Better to ship something old > > that works that new that is known to be broken? > > That would probably be wise. The latest SuSE still ships 1.65, at a > guess because they found that the later ones wouldn't compile all the > software included in the distribution. Even better might be to bribe the > texi2html maintainer... ;) the lastest SUSE (9.2) still ships teTeX 2.0.2 -- so what does this tell us about current teTeX pretest ??? ;-)) SCNR, Harald Koenig -- "I hope to die ___ _ before I *have* to use Microsoft Word.", 0--,|/OOO\ Donald E. Knuth, 02-Oct-2001 in Tuebingen.<_/ / /OOO\ \ \/OOO\ \ O|// Harald Koenig \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ science+computing ag// / \\ \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]^ ^
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
Thomas Esser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [ Harald Koenig: ] >> the patch below includes xdvi.h (which then includes strings.h) _before_ Xm.h >> which avoid this trouble. > Looks good, thanks! Thanks, I've applied the patch to the xdvi CVS version as well. Best, Stefan
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 12:09 -0800, Mike Castle wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 02:05:30PM +0100, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> > There were serious issues also with the latest stable texi2html-1.72
> > while compiling quagga. It also hung up in an infinite loop. The lastest
> > texi2html working for me was 1.66 and I was able to reproduce the
> > infinite loop issue also with any higher texi2html release.
>
> Damn. :-<
>
> Would it be wise to ship texi2html-1.66 then? Better to ship something old
> that works that new that is known to be broken?
It looks like the texi2html-1.68 and later are unable to handle this
construct for example:
@deffn Command {hostname @var{hostname}} {}
...stuff...
@end deffn
It fails at the first line stating:
*** '}' without opening '{' before: ...
Repeating the error message for a long time. The error message isn't
true since all brackets are correctly enclosed.
Thomas, if you like to reproduce it, please download quagga from:
http://quagga.net/download/quagga-0.98.0.tar.gz
and try to compile quagga.texi in the /doc subdirectory.
I agree with Mike it's better to release working 1.66 within teTeX-3.0
instead of buggy latest "stable" release.
Thanks,
Jindrich
--
Jindrich Novy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
Volker Kuhlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: >> Would it be wise to ship texi2html-1.66 then? Better to ship something old >> that works that new that is known to be broken? > > That would probably be wise. The latest SuSE still ships 1.65, at a > guess because they found that the later ones wouldn't compile all the > software included in the distribution. Even better might be to bribe the > texi2html maintainer... ;) FYI, Debian also chose to ship sarge with 1.66. http://bugs.debian.org/242637 Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
> Would it be wise to ship texi2html-1.66 then? Better to ship something old > that works that new that is known to be broken? That would probably be wise. The latest SuSE still ships 1.65, at a guess because they found that the later ones wouldn't compile all the software included in the distribution. Even better might be to bribe the texi2html maintainer... ;) Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is possibly list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 02:05:30PM +0100, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> There were serious issues also with the latest stable texi2html-1.72
> while compiling quagga. It also hung up in an infinite loop. The lastest
> texi2html working for me was 1.66 and I was able to reproduce the
> infinite loop issue also with any higher texi2html release.
Damn. :-<
Would it be wise to ship texi2html-1.66 then? Better to ship something old
that works that new that is known to be broken?
mrc
--
Mike Castle [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
> the patch below includes xdvi.h (which then includes strings.h) _before_ Xm.h > which avoid this trouble. Looks good, thanks! Thomas
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
> afaik, thomas gets things like texi2html from ctan CTAN is not my only source (unfortunately, I wish that I could find everything there), but I definitely monitor changes on CTAN better than any other source. > i suggest you mail the tug.org people to tell them to update their > copy of texi2html That's one thing. The next is that I am now unsure which version to distribute... Thomas
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 03:31:39PM +0100, Thomas Esser wrote:
> As usual: please, send me feedback, even if it all just works :-)
It all (minus the 'ln -s dvips.$(') just works on SuSE 8.?
installed as normal user :-)
Thanks for the great work!
Steffen
--
I liked things better when I didn't understand them. -- Calvin
pgprUl05SpMQw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 00:30 -0800, Mike Castle wrote: > On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 03:31:39PM +0100, Thomas Esser wrote: > > This 2.99.10 is the fourth (and hopefully last) release candidate of > > teTeX-3.0. There have been several issues with 2.99.9 which made this > > I do not yet have 2.99.10 downloaded, but looking at 2.99.9 and the new > release notes, it looks like texi2html is still at 1.70. > > Version 1.72 is out, and 1.70 has known issues with going into endless loop > (for example, try to build octave-2.1.64 sometime, texi2html never > finishes with 1.70 but 1.72 works). There were serious issues also with the latest stable texi2html-1.72 while compiling quagga. It also hung up in an infinite loop. The lastest texi2html working for me was 1.66 and I was able to reproduce the infinite loop issue also with any higher texi2html release. greetings, Jindrich -- Jindrich Novy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 03:31:39PM +0100, Thomas Esser wrote: > > This 2.99.10 is the fourth (and hopefully last) release candidate of > > teTeX-3.0. There have been several issues with 2.99.9 which made this > > I do not yet have 2.99.10 downloaded, but looking at 2.99.9 and the new > release notes, it looks like texi2html is still at 1.70. > > Version 1.72 is out, and 1.70 has known issues with going into endless loop > (for example, try to build octave-2.1.64 sometime, texi2html never > finishes with 1.70 but 1.72 works). afaik, thomas gets things like texi2html from ctan ctan mirrors tug.org for texi2html, and it would appear that tug.org gets it by hand from some web site (mirroring by http, to first order, doesn't work). i suggest you mail the tug.org people to tell them to update their copy of texi2html robin
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
Hi,
trying to compile 2.99.10.20050123 on HP-UX 11.11 with gcc-3.3.3 and Motif
breaks in xdvi
gcc -D_HPUX_SOURCE -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.
-I/soft/tex/teTeX-bin-beta-2.99.10.20050123/tetex-src-2.99.10.20050123-beta/texk/xdvik/gui
-I../.. -I/soft/tex/teTeX-bin-beta-2.99.10
.20050123/tetex-src-2.99.10.20050123-beta/texk/xdvik/.. -W -Wall
-Wunused -I..
-I/soft/tex/teTeX-bin-beta-2.99.10.20050123/tetex-src-2.99.10.20050123-beta/texk/xdvik/gui/..
-DPS_GS -DXSERVER_INFO -g -O2 -c mag.c -o mag.o
In file included from ../../kpathsea/c-memstr.h:29,
from ../../kpathsea/c-std.h:75,
from ../../kpathsea/config.h:76,
from ../xdvi.h:43,
from mag.c:42:
/usr/include/strings.h:52: error: parse error before '(' token
/usr/include/strings.h:52: error: parse error before ')' token
/usr/include/strings.h:53: error: parse error before '(' token
/usr/include/strings.h:53: error: parse error before ')' token
/usr/include/strings.h:54: error: parse error before numeric constant
gmake[3]: *** [mag.o] Error 1
because X11/Xfuncs.h #defines bcopy(...) which causes that following error
strings.h.
the patch below includes xdvi.h (which then includes strings.h) _before_ Xm.h
which avoid this trouble.
---
--- tetex-src-2.99.10.20050123-beta/texk/xdvik/gui/mag.c~ 2004-10-28
01:16:41.0 +0200
+++ tetex-src-2.99.10.20050123-beta/texk/xdvik/gui/mag.c2005-01-24
15:42:44.0 +0100
@@ -35,11 +35,12 @@
#include
#include "c-openmx.h"
+#include "xdvi.h"
+
#ifdef MOTIF
#include
#endif
-#include "xdvi.h"
#include "events.h"
#include "dvi-draw.h"
#include "dvi-init.h"
---
Harald Koenig
--
"I hope to die ___ _
before I *have* to use Microsoft Word.", 0--,|/OOO\
Donald E. Knuth, 02-Oct-2001 in Tuebingen.<_/ / /OOO\
\ \/OOO\
\ O|//
Harald Koenig \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
science+computing ag// / \\ \
[EMAIL PROTECTED]^ ^
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 03:31:39PM +0100, Thomas Esser wrote:
> This 2.99.10 is the fourth (and hopefully last) release candidate of
> teTeX-3.0. There have been several issues with 2.99.9 which made this
I do not yet have 2.99.10 downloaded, but looking at 2.99.9 and the new
release notes, it looks like texi2html is still at 1.70.
Version 1.72 is out, and 1.70 has known issues with going into endless loop
(for example, try to build octave-2.1.64 sometime, texi2html never
finishes with 1.70 but 1.72 works).
mrc
--
Mike Castle [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Jan 23, 2005, at 7:02 PM, Thomas Esser wrote: ln -s dvips.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/odvips.1 ln: `/opt/local/share/man/man1/odvips.1': File exists Argh... The line ln -s dvips.$(manext) $(man1dir)/odvips.$(manext) should be removed from texk/tetex/Makefile.in. Thanks for reporting this. That did it! Installation now works and (as far as I can tell by testing things a few minutes) everything works fine (as usual!:-) Thanks a lot for your help and for all your work, from which all of us greatly benefit, Artemio Artemio Gonzalez-Lopez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
> ln -s dvips.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/odvips.1 > ln: `/opt/local/share/man/man1/odvips.1': File exists Argh... The line ln -s dvips.$(manext) $(man1dir)/odvips.$(manext) should be removed from texk/tetex/Makefile.in. Thanks for reporting this. > /opt/local/share/man/man8, where the sources of all these links should > be, and only fmutil.8 was there. Actually, all of the above links up to No, section 8 does not mean "sources of manpages". It means "administrative commands". > man8. IThis is probably something trivial (and most likely my fault), > but I am totally befuddled. No, my fault. Thomas
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
On Jan 23, 2005, at 3:31 PM, Thomas Esser wrote: This 2.99.10 is the fourth (and hopefully last) release candidate of teTeX-3.0. ... As usual: please, send me feedback, even if it all just works :-) Unfortunately, in Mac OS X 10.3.7 (at least on the 3 computers I maintain ;-) installation chokes at the following point: cd /opt/local/share/man/man8; rm -f mktexfmt.8 ln -s allcm.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/allec.1 ln -s mktexlsr.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/texhash.1 ln -s omega.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/lambda.1 ln -s pdfetex.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/pdflatex.1 ln -s kpsetool.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/kpsepath.1 ln -s kpsetool.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/kpsexpand.1 ln -s mf.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/mf-nowin.1 ln -s cweb.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/ctangle.1 ln -s cweb.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/cweave.1 ln -s dvicopy.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/odvicopy.1 ln -s dvips.1 /opt/local/share/man/man1/odvips.1 ln: `/opt/local/share/man/man1/odvips.1': File exists make[2]: *** [install-data] Error 1 make[1]: *** [install] Error 1 make: *** [install] Error 1 The funny thing is that /opt/local/share/man/man1/odvips.1 actually does NOT exist. Also, I've checked in /opt/local/share/man/man8, where the sources of all these links should be, and only fmutil.8 was there. Actually, all of the above links up to odvips.1exist, but the corresponding source files are im man1, not man8. IThis is probably something trivial (and most likely my fault), but I am totally befuddled. Cheers, Artemio Gonzalez-Lopez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
Hi Thomas, > As usual: please, send me feedback, even if it all just works :-) 2.99.10 compiled without a problem on my Solaris 9 Ultra 60 (Sun C 5.5). Same result on our V20z with Solaris Express (Sun C 5.5). I tried texconfig and several tex files without any problem. Thanks for your good work. Willi
Re: 2.99.10: another release candidate
Thomas Esser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > * "Risky" changes in dvips > == > These have been quite some significant changes to dvips regarding font > subsetting, eepic specials and omega support. Tomas Rokicki has done these > changes with great care, but this version needs some special attention. > Test as much as you can and report bugs (to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) quickly. > *Don't* use this version for any production until it has proven to be > good. If you can do extensive tests (e.g. if you have lots of documents > which embed graphics or use eepic or are generated by omega/aleph), > please send feedback (positive or negative) to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wishlist: AUCTeX supports Omega now and it calls executables odvips and oxdvi for displaying the respective DVI files. In case that those executables (both?) have become obsolete by folding them into the "main" sources, it would still be desirable if links with the old names were installed, or it will become rather difficult to choose sane default names to call for TeX shells like AUCTeX. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
