[Bug-AUCTeX] Re: preview-1.260; dvipng warning appears to cause preview abort

[Evil Boris]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Evil Boris <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I wonder about the following stuff that appears in the log:
>> ========
>> dvipng warning: at (1,0) ignored header 
>> \special{!/address@hidden(CVS-1.107)def} dvipng warning: GhostScript calls 
>> disallowed by --noghostscript dvipng warning: GhostScript calls disallowed 
>> by --noghostscript dvipng warning: GhostScript calls disallowed by 
>> --noghostscript dvipng warning: GhostScript calls disallowed by 
>> --noghostscript dvipng warning: GhostScript calls disallowed by 
>> --noghostscript 
>> Preview-DviPNG exited abnormally with code 1 at Sun Jul 10 11:07:19
>> Running `Preview-DviPS' with ``dvips -Pwww _region_.dvi -o 
>> "_region_.prv/tmp3528gvT"/preview.ps''
>> ========
>> It seems to indicate that preview tries to run dvipng, chokes on a
>> special, considers this an error, and gives up on using dvipng...
>
> Well, no.  preview-latex runs dvipng, finds that your file uses some
> GhostScript specials, and then runs dvips and GhostScript to generate
> just those previews which rely on GhostScript.

Silly me, of course I had .PS figures in the document, no wonder there
were PS specials in there...  

So just to test this theory I just went through the document and
commented out all the \includegraphics commands.  I ran
preview-document again and got:

>  dvipng warning: at (1,0) ignored header 
> \special{!/address@hidden(CVS-1.107)def} 

now, however, preview-latex seems to ignore the warning and happily
uses all the bits and pieces produced by dvipng (at least there is no
trace of dvips+gs running in the log).

I guess what confused me was that (incorrectly, it seems) assumed that
the warnings were what triggered the failure, as they were the last
lines in the log before 
"preview-dvipng [or something similar to that] failed".

Oh well...

Thanks for quick response...

--Boris