Reinhard Kotucha <[email protected]> writes: > > >> mgs -q -dNODISPLAY -c "2 3 mul" -c quit > > > > > > Ok, now I'm using the latter. > > > > That leaves a non-empty stack, so I'd rather use "2 3 mul pop". Any > > reason why that's necessary at all? Why would not just -c quit be > > sufficient? After all, quit is interpreted by the PostScript > > interpreter just the same as 2 3 mul would be? > > Hi David, > yes, -c quit is definitely the smallest valid PostScript program I can > think of.
So fine, now we're using that. Bye, Tassilo _______________________________________________ bug-auctex mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
