James Lowe <address@hidden> writes:
On 26/05/15 08:35, David Kastrup wrote:
James Lowe <address@hidden> writes:
On 25/05/15 16:08, Phil Holmes wrote:
I can try again, but it was consistent. James might want to try?
If it helps.
I get the same thing too.
How much effort is it to do one iteration on one affected file? I have
absolutely no clue how this may come about so if one could figure out
_which_ of the added defines is responsible, it might help boiling this
down. One can probably do some sort of manual bisection on the added
commands but it would still require something like 7 runs.
I don't really have any experience with 'bisections' so if you can give
me some relatively simple instructions, I don't mind doing the gruntwork
building doc over and over.
I'm still flabbergasted at the supposed faulty commit. Here is one
theory I'd consider more plausible:
commit 5eca56fae0faa2db9cf7f12903e1a06c42b2af0d
Author: Walter Garcia-Fontes <address@hidden>
Date: Sat Feb 7 20:00:15 2015 +0100
Doc-ca: texinfo.tex and txi-ca from upstream to fix problem with
Catalan interpunct
This commit contains the following diff in tex/texinfo.tex:
@@ -8821,6 +8949,7 @@ directory should work if nowhere else does.}
\catcode\count255=#1\relax
\advance\count255 by 1
\repeat
+
}
This diff introduced a spurious empty line resulting in \par into the
command \setnonasciicharscatcodenonglobal which may be used in several
different situations, possibly reading indexes and/or macros.
This would _totally_ believably match the reported symptoms (and likely
warrants fixing). But it is definitely a different commit than
reported.
--
David Kastrup