Re: [AUCTeX] First try at the Biber support merge

[Ken Brown]

On 7/20/2012 5:42 AM, Tassilo Horn wrote:
> Marcus Frings <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > > So Biber users, could you please try applying the attached patch
> > > against AUCTeX from CVS and check if the Biber stuff also works as
> > > expected?
> >
> > The patch file applied cleanly to my CVS version. At the moment I'm
> > working with it and everything seems to be fine. If I found a weird
> > behaviour or a bug I'll report it here!
>
> Great.
>
> My main problem when compiling that patch was that there were a lot of
> differences between Philips files and the AUCTeX CVS version that didn't
> look Biber-related.  Maybe that were general improvements and fixes of
> the AUCTeX code, or maybe it was just an older AUCTeX version he worked
> on.  Since I couldn't judge that, I preferred the stock AUCTeX versions
> in those cases.

Tassilo,

My impression is that Philip's files were based on auctex-11.86, but he 
could confirm.  Based on that assumption, I did a 3-way merge (using 
diff3) of Philip's files and CVS head, using auctex-11.86 as common 
ancestor.  My patches are different from yours in a few places.

I don't want to waste everyone's time, so I'll do a little testing 
before sending my patches to the list.

Ken