Mosè Giordano <m...@gnu.org> writes:
> 2016-09-12 14:06 GMT+02:00 Arash Esbati <arash.esbati...@gmail.com>:
>> I've also patched graphics.el in order to ask for package options when
>> loaded. The macros in graphicx.el are guraded to do the right thing
>> when loaded through graphics.el (it should be the way around, but moving
>> everything into graphics.el is not an option). WDYT?
> I agree that it should be the other way around (graphicx.sty requires
> graphics.sty), but why you say this is not an option? Maybe not now
> if there is no one willing to undertake this task, but in the future?
The actual doing was not my main concern; I was more thinking about "it
is not an option for me to empty a venerable style almost completely
before asking the original author". And since it is not really
>> If ok for you,
> Only a question: why do you remove eps from the list of extensions
> allowed with pdflatex? It's true that it isn't natively supported,
> but epstopdf is allowed to run in restricted shell escape since TeX
> Live 2011 and I often use EPS images when I compile with pdflatex.
Arrggh, thanks, I forgot that completely. I left the EPS realms long
time ago; I put my figures in one PDF file and use the `page' key.
I will update the news section and submit a patch.
auctex-devel mailing list