Ken Brown <[email protected]> writes: Hi Ken,
>> My main problem when compiling that patch was that there were a lot >> of differences between Philips files and the AUCTeX CVS version that >> didn't look Biber-related. Maybe that were general improvements and >> fixes of the AUCTeX code, or maybe it was just an older AUCTeX >> version he worked on. Since I couldn't judge that, I preferred the >> stock AUCTeX versions in those cases. > > My impression is that Philip's files were based on auctex-11.86, but > he could confirm. Based on that assumption, I did a 3-way merge > (using diff3) of Philip's files and CVS head, using auctex-11.86 as > common ancestor. My patches are different from yours in a few places. Awesome, I guess your results will probably be more accurate than mine. > I don't want to waste everyone's time, so I'll do a little testing > before sending my patches to the list. Sure. Bye, Tassilo _______________________________________________ auctex mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex
