Acknowledgement sent to Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to debian-tetex-maint@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Package: linuxdoc-tools
Version: 0.9.21
Severity: important
Tags: patch
Due to a buggy test for the TeX engine used, sgml2latex will always
produce PDF even if DVI is intended with teTeX-3.0. This is because we
now use pdfTeX also for DVI output, so \pdfoutput is defined, but set to
false for DVI - but you test whether it is defined and then set it to
true.
This will cause packages to FTBFS once teTeX-3.0, currently in
experimental, gets into unstable (and then the severity will be RC). We
expect to be able to do the upload within days or weeks.
The attached patch fixes this.
Thanks in advance, Frank
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-2-386
Locale: LANG=de_DE@euro, LC_CTYPE=de_DE@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)
Versions of packages linuxdoc-tools depends on:
ii gawk 1:3.1.4-2 GNU awk, a pattern scanning and pr
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii mawk 1.3.3-11 a pattern scanning and text proces
ii perl 5.8.4-8 Larry Wall's Practical Extraction
ii sgml-base 1.26 SGML infrastructure and SGML catal
ii sgml-data 2.0.3 common SGML and XML data
ii sp 1.3.4-1.2.1-43 James Clark's SGML parsing tools
-- no debconf information
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: Coordinating upload of teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 10:03:55 +0200
Adeodato Simó <asp16@alu.ua.es> wrote:
> * Frank Küster [Mon, 08 Aug 2005 12:39:04 +0200]:
>
>> You can stop all build-depending on debiandoc-sgml: It has the classical
>> bug that produces PDF output with teTeX-3.0 even when dvi is desired,
>> causing almost everything to FTBFS. I've not yet submitted a bug,
>> because I'm still testing the patch.
>
>> Should I file it as important and bump the severity to grave only when
>> teTeX-3.0 is unstable? Or should I file as grave at once?
>
> Is the patch backwards compatible? (i.e., when used with teTeX-2.0,
> will be the output correct?) If so, I would file at important and
> ask for the patch to be applied ASAP; and NMU prior to uploading
> teTeX-3.0 if it has not been fixed by then.
Yes, it is backward compatible. It would have worked with woody (and
should in fact have been applied back then).
This is also true for the same problem in sgml2latex from linuxdoc-tools.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#321942: Coordinating upload of teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 13:08:15 +0200
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:03:55AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Adeodato Simó <asp16@alu.ua.es> wrote:
>
> > * Frank Küster [Mon, 08 Aug 2005 12:39:04 +0200]:
> >> You can stop all build-depending on debiandoc-sgml: It has the classical
> >> bug that produces PDF output with teTeX-3.0 even when dvi is desired,
> >> causing almost everything to FTBFS. I've not yet submitted a bug,
> >> because I'm still testing the patch.
The bug is now submitted (#321942) and I will fix it in CVS today. Since
I'm no DD I rely on Osamu or Ardo for doing an upload.
> >> Should I file it as important and bump the severity to grave only when
> >> teTeX-3.0 is unstable? Or should I file as grave at once?
> >
> > Is the patch backwards compatible? (i.e., when used with teTeX-2.0,
> > will be the output correct?) If so, I would file at important and
> > ask for the patch to be applied ASAP; and NMU prior to uploading
> > teTeX-3.0 if it has not been fixed by then.
>
> Yes, it is backward compatible. It would have worked with woody (and
> should in fact have been applied back then).
Please note that bug #214249 was the reason that I introduced
\ifx\pdfoutput\undefined
\usepackage[hypertex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
\else
\usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
\fi
to debiandoc-sgml package. I agree that #214249 is not very important
but the output was definitivly different for dvi and pdf without the
\ifx.
(I copied this conditional in nearly every document I wrote since 1997,
since it worked great. I do not remember excactly why I used this
but I think I found a hint in the pdftex FAQ many years ago.
So you see that my LaTeX knowlegde reduces every year, I just live from
my experiences I made years ago, at a time when I used LaTeX daily :-))
Jens
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#321942: Coordinating upload of
teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 13:50:13 +0200
Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net> wrote:
>> > Is the patch backwards compatible? (i.e., when used with teTeX-2.0,
>> > will be the output correct?) If so, I would file at important and
>> > ask for the patch to be applied ASAP; and NMU prior to uploading
>> > teTeX-3.0 if it has not been fixed by then.
>>
>> Yes, it is backward compatible. It would have worked with woody (and
>> should in fact have been applied back then).
>
> Please note that bug #214249 was the reason that I introduced
>
> \ifx\pdfoutput\undefined
> \usepackage[hypertex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \else
> \usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \fi
>
> to debiandoc-sgml package. I agree that #214249 is not very important
> but the output was definitivly different for dvi and pdf without the
> \ifx.
>
> (I copied this conditional in nearly every document I wrote since 1997,
> since it worked great.
... until somebody wants to produce DVI with pdfTeX...
Indeed, I missed the problem with breaklinks and dvips vs. hypertex.
I'll investigate this, and maybe we'll find a fix that does not need to
differentiate between PDF and DVI output.
However, for the time being, you should use ifpdf.sty instead:
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
\usepackage[hypertex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
\else
\usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
\fi
You can have a look at the code in ifpdf.sty. The purpose of all that
is not only to correctly detect whether we are running TeX, or pdfTeX in
DVI mode, or pdfTeX in PDF mode, but also to not change the
"definedness" and the setting of \pdfoutput, so that this can be checked
again. The code you use does not only fail with pdfTeX in DVI mode, it
also has the side effect that now \pdftex is \relax even when TeX is
used, and doing the test a second time will fail.
Regards, Frank
P.S. debian-tetex-maint is subscribed to both bugs, no need to Cc
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#321942: Coordinating upload of teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 02:56:23 +0200
tags 321942 + fixed-upstream pending
thanks
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 01:50:13PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Indeed, I missed the problem with breaklinks and dvips vs. hypertex.
> I'll investigate this, and maybe we'll find a fix that does not need to
> differentiate between PDF and DVI output.
Great.
> However, for the time being, you should use ifpdf.sty instead:
>
> \usepackage{ifpdf}
> \ifpdf
> \usepackage[hypertex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \else
> \usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \fi
Fixed in CVS (but the statements need to be swapped).
> You can have a look at the code in ifpdf.sty. The purpose of all that
> is not only to correctly detect whether we are running TeX, or pdfTeX in
> DVI mode, or pdfTeX in PDF mode, but also to not change the
> "definedness" and the setting of \pdfoutput, so that this can be checked
> again. The code you use does not only fail with pdfTeX in DVI mode, it
> also has the side effect that now \pdftex is \relax even when TeX is
> used, and doing the test a second time will fail.
This is only true for linuxdoc-tools since this package uses "\pdfoutput=1" but
I understand :-))
Regards, Jens
P.S. Osamu or Ardo please upload a new package. I tested it (not in such
detail as usual since I have a few problems such as lack of disc space)
and it works as expected.
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#321942: Coordinating upload of
teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 20:17:52 +0200
Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch> wrote:
> Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net> wrote:
>
>> Please note that bug #214249 was the reason that I introduced
>>
>> \ifx\pdfoutput\undefined
>> \usepackage[hypertex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
>> \else
>> \usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
>> \fi
>>
[...]
> Indeed, I missed the problem with breaklinks and dvips vs. hypertex.
> I'll investigate this, and maybe we'll find a fix that does not need to
> differentiate between PDF and DVI output.
>
> However, for the time being, you should use ifpdf.sty instead:
>
> \usepackage{ifpdf}
> \ifpdf
> \usepackage[hypertex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \else
> \usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \fi
Instead I suggest
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
\usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref}
\else
\usepackage[colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
\fi
Background:
- the breaklinks option *does* work, but it only has an effect on
document-internal links, i.e. ordinary text like in the table of
contents that links to the pages of the respective section headings.
It has no effect on the line breaking in external hyperlinks like the
ones on page 7 of the Debian-reference which was mentioned in
#214249.
- If you produce a pdf with \usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref}
(i.e. without the breaklinks option) with the sequence latex; dvips;
ps2pdf, the external links are broken over the line but still work,
but the internal links do not work (because it is the wrong driver).
- If you produce a pdf with \usepackage{hyperref} with the same sequence
latex; dvips; ps2pdf, the external links are not broken over the line,
but the internal links do work (because it takes the correct driver).
In summary, I would suggest *not* to use the sequence latex; dvips;
ps2pdf at all to produce pdf files, simply because dvips has some
limitations here. Instead, use "latex; dvips" only when you want to
provide a ps file for printing, and use pdflatex directly when you want
to make pdf files. With the setup above, both ways work fine, and the
links are not colored in the PS file which I consider nicer - the color
doesn't signify anything in the printout. Alternatively, you could use
something like
[hypertex,colorlinks=true,linkcolor=black,urlcolor=blue] to get only
URLs colored (see "texdoc hyperref/manual", section 5.4 (3.4 in
teTeX-3.0)).
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
To: 321942@bugs.debian.org, 321998@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#321942: Coordinating upload of teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 21:40:44 +0200
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 08:17:52PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch> wrote:
> > However, for the time being, you should use ifpdf.sty instead:
> >
> > \usepackage{ifpdf}
> > \ifpdf
> > \usepackage[hypertex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> > \else
> > \usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> > \fi
>
> Instead I suggest
>
> \usepackage{ifpdf}
> \ifpdf
> \usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref}
> \else
> \usepackage[colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \fi
I can only guess that you mean (I noticed that already in your last
mail!)
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
\usepackage[colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
\else
\usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref}
\fi
You assume that hyperref detects pdf mode and enables the pdftex option
by default, right? But please note that the documentation
(manual.pdf.gz, section 5.3) of hyperref contains that without specified
driver option "hypertex" is used.
So I think the following should work
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
\usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
\else
\usepackage{hyperref}
\fi
which is the same as currently used (exception: colorlinks; this breaks
external links both in dvi and pdf (created by pdflatex)) since
no driver stands for hypertex.
You do not want to drop the pdftex option, right?
> Background:
>
> - the breaklinks option *does* work, but it only has an effect on
> document-internal links, i.e. ordinary text like in the table of
> contents that links to the pages of the respective section headings.
> It has no effect on the line breaking in external hyperlinks like the
> ones on page 7 of the Debian-reference which was mentioned in
> #214249.
Ah, a little bit inconsistent but OK.
> - If you produce a pdf with \usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref}
> (i.e. without the breaklinks option) with the sequence latex; dvips;
> ps2pdf, the external links are broken over the line but still work,
> but the internal links do not work (because it is the wrong driver).
>
> - If you produce a pdf with \usepackage{hyperref} with the same sequence
> latex; dvips; ps2pdf, the external links are not broken over the line,
> but the internal links do work (because it takes the correct driver).
>
> In summary, I would suggest *not* to use the sequence latex; dvips;
> ps2pdf at all to produce pdf files, simply because dvips has some
> limitations here. Instead, use "latex; dvips" only when you want to
> provide a ps file for printing, and use pdflatex directly when you want
> to make pdf files.
I know (and added a few comments about this e.g. in my old fixlatex script
which is still in DDP). hyperref cannot guess the driver and
debiandoc2latex{dvi,ps} cannot know how the user processes the file.
I checked the DDP and noticed that only counting-potatoes and refcard
use ps2pdf.
> With the setup above, both ways work fine, and the
> links are not colored in the PS file which I consider nicer - the color
> doesn't signify anything in the printout. Alternatively, you could use
> something like
Since these links are not active in ps I agree (and the links are
underlined in dvi).
Jens
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#321942: Coordinating upload of
teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 13:05:52 +0200
Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 08:17:52PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch> wrote:
>> > However, for the time being, you should use ifpdf.sty instead:
>> >
>> > \usepackage{ifpdf}
>> > \ifpdf
>> > \usepackage[hypertex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
>> > \else
>> > \usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
>> > \fi
>>
>> Instead I suggest
>>
>> \usepackage{ifpdf}
>> \ifpdf
>> \usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref}
>> \else
>> \usepackage[colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
>> \fi
>
> I can only guess that you mean (I noticed that already in your last
> mail!)
Excuse me.
> \usepackage{ifpdf}
> \ifpdf
> \usepackage[colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \else
> \usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref}
> \fi
>
> You assume that hyperref detects pdf mode and enables the pdftex option
> by default, right? But please note that the documentation
> (manual.pdf.gz, section 5.3) of hyperref contains that without specified
> driver option "hypertex" is used.
The documentation of hyperref is notoriously outdated with respect to
the package. In fact it chooses "pdftex" for pdflatex in PDF mode, and
the "default" driver for DVI mode. However, it wasn't hyperref's
author, but Thomas Esser from teTeX who changed the default from
hypertex to dvips. hypertex is useful for DVI files, dvips for PDF
files created via latex;dvips;distiller/ps2pdf.
Generally speaking:
I think you should first decide whether you want to always go the
pdfLaTeX way when you produce PDF files, or whether there is some reason
to stick to latex;dvips;ps2pdf. There is only one reason I can think
of: Inclusion of eps files (except if created by MetaPost) is only
possible via latex;dvips;ps2pdf. On the other hand there are two
alternatives: Since this is a script for automatic creation of docs, it
shouldn't be hard to automatically convert any eps file to pdf (epstopdf
is the tool of choice) which can be used with pdflatex, or you can use
latex to produce a DVI plus dvipdfm to produce the PDF - I'm not
familiar with that way, but the hyperref driver is dvipdfm in this case.
If you have decided that you will create DVI files only for producing PS
files for printout, not for further processing to PDF, then things are
easy. Either you use hyperref.sty for DVI files only in draft mode to
get the \url command (since there are no clickable hyperlinks on
paper...), or---if you also want to create DVI files for online
viewing---use \usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref} to get clickable links in
xdvi. The color is a matter of taste then - black color because the
printout looks better, or colors because it's easier to see in xdvi.
If you ensist on using latex and dvips to produce PDF files, then you
have to either live with non-broken links (with dvips) or non-working
links (with hypertex; it seems that the URL links magically do work,
only the internal links not, in tex files produced by debiandoc-sgml,
although not in a small example document).
> So I think the following should work
> \usepackage{ifpdf}
> \ifpdf
> \usepackage[pdftex,colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> \else
> \usepackage{hyperref}
> \fi
>
> which is the same as currently used (exception: colorlinks; this breaks
> external links both in dvi and pdf (created by pdflatex)) since
> no driver stands for hypertex.
No, it isn't ideal.
- For DVI mode, this would (because of the change in teTeX) choose dvips,
which has the effect that links are not broken over the line (because
dvips---or even PS---doesn't support this). This is ugly (and the
cause of that old bug #29xxxx).
Using [hypertex] for DVI output results in line breaking in URL links,
I have checked this. Internal links will not work (because dvips
doesn't understand the instructions from the hypertex driver), but
that does not matter if you want to create only PS files for
printout. Internal links will still not be broken -- this can be
changed with the breaklinks option.
- In PDF mode, your proposal works - currently
> You do not want to drop the pdftex option, right?
Yes, I do, because it's the autodeteced default for pdfTeX in PDF mode,
anyway, and because not specifying a driver makes things easier if there
is a new, better default for pdfTeX in PDF mode.
> I checked the DDP and noticed that only counting-potatoes and refcard
> use ps2pdf.
We could file bugs against those, requesting them to use
debiandoc2latexpdf directly.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#321942: Coordinating upload of teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:54:16 +0200
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 01:05:52PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 08:17:52PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch> wrote:
> >> Instead I suggest
> >
> > I can only guess that you mean (I noticed that already in your last
> > mail!)
>
> Excuse me.
No problem.
> > \usepackage{ifpdf}
> > \ifpdf
> > \usepackage[colorlinks=true]{hyperref}
> > \else
> > \usepackage[hypertex]{hyperref}
> > \fi
OK. I will use this.
> > You assume that hyperref detects pdf mode and enables the pdftex option
> > by default, right? But please note that the documentation
> > (manual.pdf.gz, section 5.3) of hyperref contains that without specified
> > driver option "hypertex" is used.
>
> The documentation of hyperref is notoriously outdated with respect to
> the package. In fact it chooses "pdftex" for pdflatex in PDF mode, and
> the "default" driver for DVI mode. However, it wasn't hyperref's
> author, but Thomas Esser from teTeX who changed the default from
> hypertex to dvips.
I strongly suggest to update the documentation as well. Is it not
possible for you to add at least a patch to the Debian package?
Fixing one or two lines in manual.pdf would avoid a lot of trouble.
> hypertex is useful for DVI files, dvips for PDF files created via
> latex;dvips;distiller/ps2pdf.
The main goal of debiandoc2latexdvi is to produce DVI files for xdvi
(and hyphen_show from package hyphen-show), debiandoc2latexps
creates printable PS files (these should never converted to PDF) and
debiandoc2latexpdf creates ordinary PDF files.
All these scripts use debiandoc2latex to create the .tex file which would
be perfect for dvi and pdf.
Most likely I will change the dvips call to use option -z which creates
valid external links and breaks the lines after applying ps2pdf (which I
still not recommend, but users may call it).
The dvips option is useless without convertion to PDF using ps2pdf,
right? There is no Postscript viewer which supports links?
> I think you should first decide whether you want to always go the
> pdfLaTeX way when you produce PDF files, or whether there is some reason
Yes, always.
> to stick to latex;dvips;ps2pdf. There is only one reason I can think
>
> If you have decided that you will create DVI files only for producing PS
> files for printout, not for further processing to PDF, then things are
Yes and for xdvi.
> easy.
> If you ensist on using latex and dvips to produce PDF files, then you
> have to either live with non-broken links (with dvips) or non-working
> links (with hypertex; it seems that the URL links magically do work,
> only the internal links not, in tex files produced by debiandoc-sgml,
> although not in a small example document).
Even using dvi->ps->pdf dvips with option -z enables working links.
dvips option of hyperref is not compatible with a Japanese \chaptername
(I redefined this in combination with using the cjk-latex package):
! Improper alphabetic constant.
<to be read again>
\count
l.145 \chapter{€Ï€ž€á€Ë}
So will definitively not use dvips option but hypertex.
> - For DVI mode, this would (because of the change in teTeX) choose dvips,
> which has the effect that links are not broken over the line (because
> dvips---or even PS---doesn't support this). This is ugly (and the
> cause of that old bug #29xxxx).
Another reason not to use dvips option.
> Using [hypertex] for DVI output results in line breaking in URL links,
> I have checked this. Internal links will not work (because dvips
> doesn't understand the instructions from the hypertex driver), but
Except using option -z (tested only with external links) and of course
in xdvi.
> that does not matter if you want to create only PS files for
Right.
> printout. Internal links will still not be broken -- this can be
> changed with the breaklinks option.
>
> > I checked the DDP and noticed that only counting-potatoes and refcard
> > use ps2pdf.
>
> We could file bugs against those, requesting them to use
> debiandoc2latexpdf directly.
OK, I will do so.
Jens
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: [debiandoc-sgml-pkgs] Bug#321942: Coordinating upload of
teTeX-3.0 to unstable
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 15:19:19 +0200
Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 01:05:52PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>>
>> The documentation of hyperref is notoriously outdated with respect to
>> the package. In fact it chooses "pdftex" for pdflatex in PDF mode, and
>> the "default" driver for DVI mode. However, it wasn't hyperref's
>> author, but Thomas Esser from teTeX who changed the default from
>> hypertex to dvips.
>
> I strongly suggest to update the documentation as well. Is it not
> possible for you to add at least a patch to the Debian package?
> Fixing one or two lines in manual.pdf would avoid a lot of trouble.
The whole stuff is outdated and user-unfriendly. It doesn't make much
sense to fix one or two lines - there's more wrong things in there than
just about the default driver. I once downloaded the documentation
source to help Heiko with a rewrite, but I didn't get far. And Heiko
says that he doesn't have enough time for hyperref, so the time he has
he rather spends on coding (and supporting users on de.comp.text.tex -
most don't read the docs, anyway).
> The dvips option is useless without convertion to PDF using ps2pdf,
> right? There is no Postscript viewer which supports links?
I never used the -z option, but I don't know of a PS viewer that
supports links, either. Maybe on MacOS.
>> Using [hypertex] for DVI output results in line breaking in URL links,
>> I have checked this. Internal links will not work (because dvips
>> doesn't understand the instructions from the hypertex driver), but
>
> Except using option -z (tested only with external links) and of course
> in xdvi.
Aha - this is why it worked with debiandoc2ps and ps2pdf, but not with
my own test document.
Okay, fine then. Can you send me a patch that contains only the changes
you made because of this bug, not other changes from the same upload?
I'm planning to create backports of sarge packages for use with the
teTeX-3.0-for-sarge backports, and would like to keep as close to the
sarge state as possible.
TIA, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: [NMU] Re: linuxdoc-tools: [sgml2latex] Fails to produce DVI output
with teTeX-3.0, always PDF
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 11:07:53 +0200
severity 321998 serious
thanks
Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> wrote:
> This will cause packages to FTBFS once teTeX-3.0, currently in
> experimental, gets into unstable (and then the severity will be RC). We
> expect to be able to do the upload within days or weeks.
I'm going to upload teTex-3.0 this week, therefore raising the
severity. If there isn't an upload of linuxdoc-tools that fixes this
bug until then, I'm going to NMU the package to prevent FTBFS bugs.
> The attached patch fixes this.
I'm going to use the patch given in the first mail to that bug, together
with an appropriate changelog entry. The discussions later in the bug
are in fact irrelevant for linuxdoc-tools (or rather, they are
irrelevant for the patch to fix this bug, but may still require further
consideration by the maintainer).
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Severity set to `serious'.
Request was from Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(full text, mbox, link).
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: [NMU] Re: linuxdoc-tools: [sgml2latex] Fails to produce DVI
output with teTeX-3.0, always PDF
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 20:31:37 +0200
Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch> wrote:
> severity 321998 serious
> thanks
>
> Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> wrote:
>
>> This will cause packages to FTBFS once teTeX-3.0, currently in
>> experimental, gets into unstable (and then the severity will be RC). We
>> expect to be able to do the upload within days or weeks.
>
> I'm going to upload teTex-3.0 this week, therefore raising the
> severity. If there isn't an upload of linuxdoc-tools that fixes this
> bug until then, I'm going to NMU the package to prevent FTBFS bugs.
Sorry if this is a little bit fast. But I decided today that I'd better
upload teTeX today. So, in order to prevent packages from FTBFS
tomorrow, I'm doing the NMU now.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Tags added: fixed
Request was from Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(full text, mbox, link).
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org: Bug#321998; Package linuxdoc-tools.
(full text, mbox, link).
Acknowledgement sent to Taketoshi Sano <sano@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list.
(full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: Bug#321998: [NMU] Re: linuxdoc-tools: [sgml2latex] Fails to
produce DVI output with teTeX-3.0, always PDF
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 07:16:28 +0900 (JST)
Thank you Frank for your contribution.
I'll check your patch later.
--
Taketoshi Sano: <kgh12351@nifty.ne.jp>
Bug marked as fixed in version 0.9.21-0.1, send any further explanations to Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>
Request was from "Adam D. Barratt" <debian-bts@adam-barratt.org.uk>
to control@bugs.debian.org.
(full text, mbox, link).
Message sent on to Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>:
Bug#321998.
(full text, mbox, link).
# Hi,
#
# These bugs were fixed in an NMU, but have not been acknowledged by the
# maintainers. With version tracking in the Debian BTS, it is important
# to know which version of a package fixes each bug so that they can be
# tracked for release status, so I'm closing these bugs with the
#relevant version information now
close 271427 8.14+v8.11+urw-0.1
close 314698 0.35-2.1
close 325635 0.35-2.1
close 328017 0.35-2.1
close 320115 2.0-4.2
close 320284 1.11
close 320899 11.4.1870-7.1
close 327078 11.4.1870-7.1
close 327349 11.4.1870-7.1
close 320903 1:0.71-1.2
close 327946 1:0.71-1.2
close 320941 2.0.3-1.1
close 321126 2.6.3.2
close 321545 0.1.3b-1.1
close 341341 0.1.3b-1.1
close 321553 0.1.12-2.2
close 321644 2:1.7.12-1.1
close 346013 2:1.7.12-1.1
close 321816 2.61-2.1
close 321967 4.0.0-2.1
close 330024 4.0.0-2.1
close 321998 0.9.21-0.1
close 322583 0.3.8.1-4
close 322853 0.7.1-3.1
close 356739 0.7.1-3.1
close 322961 0.4.3.1.dfsg-0.1
close 322972 9.4.2-2.4
close 323084 0.4.5+cvs20030824-1.4
close 323160 0.1.10-0.1
close 323355 1.2.11-0.2
close 323725 0.18.2-10.1
close 323942 0.4.0-4.1
close 324371 4.3-18.1
close 324553 2.9.5.0.37.5.2
close 324558 1.2-release-2.1
close 324579 1.11-6.2
close 324606 1.2-release-2.2
close 324908 0.12.4-4.1
close 325210 2.6.0-1.1
close 325490 0.7.1-1.1
close 325514 0.8.6-1.1
close 326468 0.8.6-1.1
close 325532 2:1.7.12-1
close 327366 2:1.7.12-1
close 329778 2:1.7.12-1
close 332480 2:1.7.12-1
close 325635 0.35-2.1
close 328017 0.35-2.1
close 325835 0.1.12-7.1
close 325851 2:1.7.8-1sarge2
close 325938 0.9.8beta2-4.1
close 327930 0.9.8beta2-4.1
close 326285 0.99.3-5.1
close 326295 0.8.2-5.1
close 373110 0.8.2-5.1
close 379331 0.8.2-5.1
close 379334 0.8.2-5.1
close 326298 0.2.12-2.1
close 326311 0.3.5-1pre1.1
close 326355 2.1.8-2.1
close 326362 0.6-7.2
close 326371 0.90beta1-10.1
close 326372 1.0-0.1
close 326378 0.1.17-4.3
close 326466 6.3.2-2.1
close 347129 6.3.2-2.1
close 347205 6.3.2-2.1
close 326489 0.3.7-2.1
close 326756 1.0.9-1.1
close 365518 1.0.9-1.1
close 327429 1.2-1.1
close 350429 1.2-1.1
close 327911 2.3.5-1.1
close 327718 0.6.0-8.2
close 327933 0.9.2-1.1
close 327936 0.8.5-1.1
close 327970 0.5.1-2.1
close 327984 1.3-2.1
close 327986 0.2.36-4.1
close 291328 0.2.36-4.1
close 327996 1.0-1.1
close 328002 1.0.0-9.1
close 328018 2.1.3-2.1
close 328039 1.18A-2.1
close 328172 1.002-0.2
close 328333 4.1.2-1.1
close 328334 1.34-7.1
close 328335 0.8.2-2.1
close 328352 0.13-3.1
close 328364 0.4.0-test5-2.1
close 329467 1.3.1
close 330446 0.1.83
close 333857 0.1.83
close 330666 6:6.2.4.5-0.2
close 330938 0.5.1-2.2
Bug archived.
Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <owner@bugs.debian.org>
to internal_control@bugs.debian.org.
(Wed, 27 Jun 2007 08:17:40 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU General
Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained
from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.