[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: BOUNCE address@hidden: Non-member submission from ["Derek R. Pri

From: Raja R Harinath
Subject: Re: BOUNCE address@hidden: Non-member submission from ["Derek R. Price" <address@hidden>]
Date: 19 Dec 2000 16:23:14 -0600
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/21.0.93

"Derek R. Price" <address@hidden> writes:
> Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> > address@hidden writes:
> >  > Assuming I have a texinfo.tex & a pdftexinfo.tex, both in '.', is there
> >  > some command that will allow 'texi2dvi foo.texi' and 'texi2dvi --pdf
> >  > foo.texi' to each find the appropriate texinfo.tex?
> >
> > surely the simpler answer is to put pdftexinfo.tex into the
> > texmf/pdftex tree, and call it texinfo.tex?
> Actually, yeah, and that was my solution, but I was trying to help out the
> Automake folks who got me into this mess in the first place.  :)
> Basically, the issue is that the GNU coding standards state that the
> texinfo.tex you built your docs with should be included with a source
> distribution so that an end user is sure to be able to build your docs too.
> So Automake attempts to force this issue and copy its texinfo.tex into any
> directory where docs are built unless it is overridden.  Unfortunately, if
> you are attempting to build both PDFs and other types of output in the same
> directory from the same source files, this would disable either the building
> of PDFs or it would disable everything else.

Actually, new versions of texinfo.tex from seem to not
need a special pdftexinfo.tex.

- Hari
Raja R Harinath ------------------------------ address@hidden
"When all else fails, read the instructions."      -- Cahn's Axiom
"Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing."   -- Roy L Ash

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]