James Lowe <[email protected]> writes: > On 26/05/15 08:35, David Kastrup wrote: >> James Lowe <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> On 25/05/15 16:08, Phil Holmes wrote: >>>> I can try again, but it was consistent. James might want to try? >>> >>> If it helps. >>> >>> I get the same thing too. >> >> How much effort is it to do one iteration on one affected file? I have >> absolutely no clue how this may come about so if one could figure out >> _which_ of the added defines is responsible, it might help boiling this >> down. One can probably do some sort of manual bisection on the added >> commands but it would still require something like 7 runs. >> > > I don't really have any experience with 'bisections' so if you can give > me some relatively simple instructions, I don't mind doing the gruntwork > building doc over and over.
I'm still flabbergasted at the supposed faulty commit. Here is one theory I'd consider more plausible: commit 5eca56fae0faa2db9cf7f12903e1a06c42b2af0d Author: Walter Garcia-Fontes <[email protected]> Date: Sat Feb 7 20:00:15 2015 +0100 Doc-ca: texinfo.tex and txi-ca from upstream to fix problem with Catalan interpunct This commit contains the following diff in tex/texinfo.tex: @@ -8821,6 +8949,7 @@ directory should work if nowhere else does.} \catcode\count255=#1\relax \advance\count255 by 1 \repeat + } This diff introduced a spurious empty line resulting in \par into the command \setnonasciicharscatcodenonglobal which may be used in several different situations, possibly reading indexes and/or macros. This would _totally_ believably match the reported symptoms (and likely warrants fixing). But it is definitely a different commit than reported. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
