severity wishlist 265743 thanks Thanks Ray for the work around. As Jens Seidel reported, tetex-bin version 2.0.2-15 did not reproduce it. This may be solved issue but it may be interesting for people updating TeX/LaTeX packages especially work around reported. > On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 19:51:31 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > Transcript written on pdflatex.log. > > fmtutil: /var/lib/texmf/web2c/pdflatex.fmt installed. > > (Fatal format file error; I'm stymied) > > debiandoc2latexpdf: ERROR: reference.en.pdf could not be generated properly > > make[1]: *** [reference.en.pdf] Error 1 > > > > I assume this has to do with the recent changes to tetex-bin, but I'm not > > really sure. Sigh :-( I am wondering how TeX/LaTeX folks feel about RC bugs on documentation packages due to recent TeX/LaTeX package situation. Look at Bug #265247 (or #265247), #265611, #264394, #263840, ... it ain't pretty sight. I do not feel like adding build script hack now to package just to get away for FTBFS serious bug unless TeX/LaTeX is stabilized. If anyone care to file a RC bug on Documentation package which build correctly in relatively recent testing and stable version of TeX/LaTeX, I think it is TeX/LaTeX important bug and it should be solved THERE. If people keep insisting these TeX/LaTeX caused FTBFS as RC, it only force package to ship without PS/PDF. No one gain. I know TeX/LaTeX has been quite actively updated. IMHO, it should be very stable when FREEZE starts. But reality is not. If you think about TeX/LateX, it is like GCC for C program. We should not make major change with incompatibility at this late moment. But it happened. If anyone insists this to be RC, I will reassign this to TeX/LateX but people there seems handful with similar reports and such an big example file like this package is tough one to track the bugs. So, I am making this a "wishlist" for now and I will close this one if latest unstable environment build OK. (I CC this to debian-doc so other doc maintainer will e aware of.) On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 11:07:47PM +0200, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote: > Looks like it. Changing bin/debiandoc2latexpdf's "pdflatex" call to a > "pdfelatex" one seems to be a workaround. If new "pdfelatex" is needed, why this was not offered as an alternative of pdflatex so it does not break build script. Is this already fix? This looks like one of etex transition issue withing TeX/LateX. Osamu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature