[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: texi2dvi: A more pleasant way to compile
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: texi2dvi: A more pleasant way to compile |
Date: |
Thu, 02 Jun 2005 09:35:04 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
>>> "Stepan" == Stepan Kasal <address@hidden> writes:
> OTOH, if you adopt my approach--build in a subdir, but copy the xref files
> after a successful compilation, you get all the advantages from Akim's
> initial patch decription [foot-2] and you are still backward compatible.
But you lose the persistence of the original aux files. Unless you
want to copy them first into the t2d dir? I'm not sure that overall
that's is simpler than supporting the traditional and the newer
scheme.
> So I suggest that we first implement the backward compatible part.
> Akim, do you have time to extract that part of your patch?
If that's what it takes to have the newer scheme then, I'll do that :(
> And what happens if dvi output is substantially different from pdf output?
> Both outputs will be generated correctly. If you run "dvi, pdf, dvi, ..."
> the process will be slow. But when you work on a manual, you usually don't
> do that; you just use one format for most of the work, and you debug the
> other one only occassionally. So I still think this is not a big problem.
My point is more that I have faced several times *incompatibilities*
of aux files bw DVI and PDF that caused LaTeX to exist prematurely.
In such a situation you have to "make clean" and start again. So your
sequence is more like
dvi, clean, pdf, clean, dvi...
and that's expensive.
Nevertheless, I agree that wanting both DVI and PDF is probably not a
common situation.
Re: texi2dvi: A more pleasant way to compile, Karl Berry, 2005/06/03