Hi David, >>>>> David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > Ikumi Keita <ik...@ikumi.que.jp> writes: >> I hope that David comments on this issue. In particular, I'd like to >> know, or to know to how to judge, whether "the initial colors set up >> inside of Ghostscript" still interfere with color.sty or not.
> It's been so long ago that I did this stuff that I don't really remember > the details. What may be the case is > forcing the loading of color.sty is heavy-handed, may bind the output to > a particular backend (there is, for example, dvipdf for generating PDF > from DVI, a valid option of further DVI processing) and may be > incompatible with other color options like using xcolor.sty (or whatever > it was called). > Also color.sty produces additional special codes that may interact with > typesetting. > Doing this at the Ghostscript level instead did not mess with the LaTeX > processing. Thanks, I'll search some way to minimize the impact of forced loading of color.sty along with the idea Jean proposed. > I am not sure whether searching in the bug mailing list will turn up the > problems that triggered going via this path. The links to the old archives of AUCTeX-related ML listed on https://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/mailing-lists.html are all dead (dir.gmane.org is not respoding), so it seems impossible to search in these old archives... In addition, the gmane links to the current ML are also dead. Regards, Ikumi Keita _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
