[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases
From: |
Mosè Giordano |
Subject: |
Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Oct 2015 23:47:55 +0200 |
Hi Tassilo,
2015-10-16 23:03 GMT+02:00 Tassilo Horn <address@hidden>:
> Mosè Giordano <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>>> I'm fine with a new release, I'd just like to fix some bugs before the
>>>> release, like https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=19504 (I
>>>> looked at it some days ago but I didn't find new solution apart from
>>>> those I suggested there -- if we can't find a solution soon we can go
>>>> ahead with the new release anyway).
>>>
>>> What's wrong with the third version of `TeX-completing-read-multiple'?
>>> I mean, of course it's not overly charming to have three different
>>> versions of a function
>>
>> Ok, my question is: can we pick up the old Emacs' definition of
>> `completing-read-multiple' even if it has internal (crm--*) functions?
>
> Yes, at least as long as those are defined and right now they are.
Well, done.
>>>> BTW, before a new release I'd like to know if AUCTeX should cater
>>>> for the mess OS X El Capitan created with MacTeX. Feedback is
>>>> welcome in this regard.
>>>
>>> I didn't know about such issues. And a quick google search pointed
>>> me to https://tug.org/mactex/UpdatingForElCapitan.pdf where it is
>>> only said that /usr/texbin/ is gone and now users need to put
>>> /Library/TeX/texbin/ in their PATH. So what?
>>
>> Yes, I meant this problem, but can users sort this problem out by
>> themselves or should AUCTeX help them?
>
> In general, I think having a working TeX distribution installed and
> properly configured is a requirement we can take for granted.
Good point.
> But we
> could test (executable-find "tex") top-level and message a big fat
> warning if that returns nil, and we might also test `system-type' to
> give a Mac-specific warning.
Please find attached a patch. Actually, my idea would be to do
something like what we do with viewer binaries, ie add an optional
entry to `TeX-command-list' elements with the name of the binary to be
checked. And maybe define also a `TeX-command-list-builtin' to avoid
problems. But I think to implement these ideas after rolling the new
release.
Bye,
Mosè
check-tex.patch
Description: Text Data
- [AUCTeX] minor releases, giacomo boffi, 2015/10/16
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Tassilo Horn, 2015/10/16
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Mosè Giordano, 2015/10/16
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Mosè Giordano, 2015/10/16
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Tassilo Horn, 2015/10/16
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Mosè Giordano, 2015/10/16
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Tassilo Horn, 2015/10/16
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases,
Mosè Giordano <=
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Tassilo Horn, 2015/10/19
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, David Kastrup, 2015/10/19
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Mosè Giordano, 2015/10/19
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Tassilo Horn, 2015/10/19
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Mosè Giordano, 2015/10/19
- Re: [AUCTeX] minor releases, Tassilo Horn, 2015/10/19