Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.86; pngs not being generated by preview-latex

[Clark Taylor]

Replies are below...

On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Ralf Angeli <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> * Clark Taylor (2010-10-10) writes:
>
> > I cannot get preview-latex working on my system with Windows Vista.  I
> > have all of the other programs properly installed (I have done this
> > numerous times on other systems), but when I run preview with the simple
> > latex file below, I get a big red stop sign instead of my beautiful
> > \mu.
>
> Have you also tried this with a simpler file?  Something like this:
>
> \documentclass{article}
> \begin{document}
> $\mu$
> \end{document}
>
Same problem exactly.

> You could also check with circ.tex which comes with preview-latex.
>
> > I run gswin32c from the command line (using all the same switches as auctex
> > generates) and it properly converts a pdf
> > into a png.  In addition, it runs from anywhere in the command line so I
> > know the path is set up properly.
> >
> > Finally, I can look at the output of the preview command (using C-c C-l)
> > and look in the directory where it is putting temporary files.  While
> > the .dsc is generated, there are not .png files showing up in this
> > directory.  I am at a lose as to why.
>
> All the output you included in the mail is not done with TeX PDF mode
> active.  It would be interesting to see the output when the mode is
> active and the route via the .dsc file is actually chosen.  It would
> also be interesting to know if TeX PDF mode being active or not makes a
> difference.
>
I turned off pdf mode and have the same result.  On other computers, I
have always done this in the past with pdf mode on and it has worked
fine.

The two things that are different this time (that I can think of) from
my normal installs are that (1) this is the first time I have been
using Vista and (2) Ghostscript seems to be a new version (9.0.0).

> By the way, please don't send HTML mails to the AUCTeX mailing lists.
> Plain text can convey the information satisfactorily and does not waste
> so much space and bandwidth.
>
Sorry about that.  I got lazy and forgot to check.  Fixed for this
e-mail (I hope!)

Clark