I noticed that you reported that the PDF generation fails on your computer, 
but i did not notice your references to pages in the online documentation, 
which I now see must indicate that you had downloaded the links I posted. 
Sorry for not reading carefully.

I was not sure that anyone would look into this issue, and if you just 
wanted to have a PDF for printing/reading, downloading might be a viable 
option.

In my opinion this is a bug in Sphinx (or some dependency/version issue on 
your system), because Spinx does not give an error on our documentation, 
but generates invalid .tex files.

kl. 12:37:55 UTC+1 tirsdag 7. januar 2014 skrev Marcus Urban følgende:
>
> You missed my point. It's not about wanting a PDF version of the 
> documentation. I know that I can download it, although I reiterate that the 
> PDF version online has tables on p. 114 and 116 that are essentially 
> unreadable. My point is that the build procedure for the documentation is 
> failing.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:48 AM, Ivar Nesje <[email protected] <javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>> If you just want a pdf of the documentation you can download it from 
>> https://media.readthedocs.org/pdf/julia/latest/julia.pdf or 
>> https://media.readthedocs.org/pdf/julia/release-0.2/julia.pdf
>>
>> Ivar
>>
>> kl. 10:14:58 UTC+1 tirsdag 7. januar 2014 skrev Marcus Urban følgende:
>>>
>>> Building the PDF version of the documentation fails for me. Following 
>>> the instructions in doc/README.md, "make helpdb.jl" and "make html" worked 
>>> without error. However, "make latexpdf" fails with the error
>>>
>>> ! Package inputenc Error: Unicode char \u8:你 not set up for use with 
>>> LaTeX.
>>>
>>> My LaTeX installation (MacTeX/TeX Live) works fine for everything else, 
>>> so I am not sure how to fix the problem. I see that there is a problem with 
>>> unicode characters. I was able to produce a PDF using xelatex, but I had to 
>>> hack on JuliaLanguage.tex manually, removing some options that were 
>>> incompatible with xelatex, adding a fake CJK* that is a no-op, and then 
>>> editing one instance of a tabular that xelatex sees as an error (p. 114 in 
>>> the online PDF). I also noticed that this table and one on p. 116 have 
>>> issues in the typesetting in the online PDF, so those tables seem to be an 
>>> issue either way.
>>>
>>>
>

Reply via email to