Wow, I expected a little help, but never to spark such a conversation.
Thanks to all for the comments.

Thanks to all who suggested sticking with one file. That was the main
issue I needed to sort out, and I'm glad I have a way foward

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Scott Randby <> wrote:
> You don't have to compile the whole document every time. You can
> export a subtree: C-c C-e, C-s changes the export scope.

I had never tried out this feature before. I had previously customized
org-latex-link-with-unknown-path-format to help me catch link
typos [1], which causes subtree (pdf) export to fail if it includes a link
that is out of scope. Nevertheless, I may come back to this and adjust
the behavior if I end up having problems with export time.

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 2:51 AM, Marcin Borkowski <> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 26 Nov 2014 at 19:00, Jacob Gerlach wrote:
>> I am working on adapting a thesis LaTeX template into org-mode. The
>> template is set up with a main.tex having several individual files
>> (chapters, appendices, etc) \include'd.
> Is that required in any way?  I'd be surprised if it was.

Not at all required. I'm working from an already-created template
that meets the format requirements. The template is set up with
separate files. All that's required is the final pdf format.

> (FYI: you can also fold things in AUCTeX.)
Didn't realize that, but I'll probably stick with Org for now!

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 5:09 AM, Eric S Fraga <> wrote:
> For me, the killer feature is the ability to put inline tasks in the
> document so that I know what I need to work on without having to have a
> separate task list or todo items within my general day to day task
> list.  Then a simple "C-c / t" shows me all the tasks for the current
> document.

Thus far I've mostly used Org as a LaTeX editor and haven't really
taken the time to learn and use the task tracking, but I really like
this idea. I haven't looked, but I'm sure there are variables to
control whether TODO state gets exported.

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Rainer M Krug <> wrote:
> Don't forget latexmk which runns in an emacs shell or even a
> different terminal, monitors file changes, and if a file changes
> compiles the latex file - so exporting from org is exporting to latex
> only, and the pdf is creqated in the background.

Inded, I have org-latex-pdf-process set to:
("latexmk -f -pdf %f" "latexmk -f -pdf %f")
And I always export directly to pdf.

> I use it daily and it works perfectly.
I often find that latexmk fails to resolve links after I've made some
minor changes to a document. I haven't put much effort into troubleshooting
this - I end up running pdflatex over the file 2 extra times. I
suppose I should add that to org-latex-pdf-process...

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Richard Lawrence
<> wrote:
> Here are a couple of other things to think about.  When I decided to go
> with Org, I took a few steps to ensure that if I ever need to switch to
> pure LaTeX, I will be able to do so with minimal pain, just by exporting
> my Org document to .tex and going from there.  (The big sticking point
> here for me was making sure I could produce human-readable, stable
> labels and refs for things like sections.  See the variable
> org-latex-custom-id-as-label, which was introduced by a patch I wrote.)

This sounds helpful. I'm using ELPA (tracking maint?) and don't see
this variable. Was your patch applied to master?

> Another thing to think ahead about is how you want to deal with your
> bibliography.  People on this list use different approaches.  I
> personally keep my reading tasks and notes in Org, then generate a .bib
> file from this as needed during compilation of my thesis.  Others keep
> bibliographic information directly in .bib.  I think you'll find there
> are good tools for either approach, but one or the other will probably
> fit better into your workflow, and may affect how easily you can export
> to other formats.

Yes, I know I have a lot to figure out in this arena. That's another day...


Reply via email to