Julien Rioux writes:
> On 08/02/2012 12:30 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
>> That also looks a bit hacky/difficult to understand why we do it.
>>
>> Is it the case, then, that with --quiet or --batch, texi2pdf carries on
>> processing despite errors occurring and only stops at the end, whereas
>> without
On 08/02/2012 12:30 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
That also looks a bit hacky/difficult to understand why we do it.
Is it the case, then, that with --quiet or --batch, texi2pdf carries on
processing despite errors occurring and only stops at the end, whereas
without those it stops immediately?
--
Phil
- Original Message -
From: "Julien Rioux"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: texi2pdf errors
Phil Holmes philholmes.net> writes:
So - I think we have 2 options to improve this:
1) Put something in the CG about failing texi2pdf build and how
Phil Holmes philholmes.net> writes:
> So - I think we have 2 options to improve this:
>
> 1) Put something in the CG about failing texi2pdf build and how to debug it
> 2) Write another shell script much simpler than run-and-check that runs
> texi2pdf, check its return value, and if it's a fail,
As is stands _right now_ an error creating a pdf file using texi2pdf in make
doc is a bit difficult to trace. That's because we now run texi2pdf with
the --quiet option, so any output generated goes to a logfile which it
silently creates. So if I put some rubbish in notation and run make doc,
