[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Spanish pdf files



Le 14/04/2012 07:31, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino a écrit :
> I will try to review the issues and see what's wrong with the build.

It looks like some encoding issue, probably related to the (assumed)
default encoding for some language, and the text automatically added for
some language; e.g. Apéndice in Spanish:

$ make pdf LINGUA=es architecture=all
[…]
stdin.out:81: Missing number, treated as zero.
stdin.out:81: leading text: ...tualizar su sistema squeeze}{Ap�ndice.a.A}
stdin.out:81: TeX capacity exceeded, sorry [grouping levels=255].
stdin.out:81: leading text: ...tualizar su sistema squeeze}{Ap�ndice.a.A}
Unexpected error occured

I thought we solved a similar issue in debian-edu-doc recently, but
can't remember right now the trick we used. I also tried to build it
with “--backend=xetex” but it solves only part of the issues in Sid, and
none in Squeeze. If someone got some idea, pointer or patch feel welcome
to share.

> However, if build in unstable is working fine,

Not anymore.

> wouldn't it be best to have
> a way to build documents in a chroots and make www-master use those (some
> kind of override of the general stable builds).

Not really: many tools in the build chain can change quite a lot between
versions, and a documentation that used to build can FTBFS because of a
changed dependency quite easily (as seen during this release cycle,
until the very last days before the freeze).

Furthermore, given the time we actually need to (not) fix this kind of
issues in a *stable* release, I doubt we will ever be able to do that in
an automatically updated unstable chroot. The only safe way, in my point
of view, is to rely on packaged documentation, already built, and
uploaded in the archive (because the uploader as no choice to actually
make sure the package builds).

Maybe the release-notes should be maintain as an actual package too…

Regards

David


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: