On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 09:54:57PM +0100, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
John Darrington <[email protected]> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 08:25:20PM +0100, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
>
> John Darrington <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > * build-aux/texinfo.tex,ref: New file, copied from texlive-minimal
> > * bootstrap: Use it, if newer than the texinfo.tex from automake.
> > ---
> > bootstrap | 11 +-
> > build-aux/texinfo.tex,ref | 11562
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 11572 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > create mode 100644 build-aux/texinfo.tex,ref
> >
>
> Do you know why building Guix manual fails to build with older
> "texinfo.tex"?
>
> If this related to some special texinfo syntax used in Guix manual?
>
> Yes. It's the use of @inlinefmtifelse command. (perhaps other commands
too).
There is only one instance of this command which is in "doc/guix.texi":
If you are instead planning to encrypt the root partition, you can use
the Cryptsetup/LUKS utilities to do that (see @inlinefmtifelse{html,
@uref{https://linux.die.net/man/8/cryptsetup, @code{man cryptsetup}},
@code{man cryptsetup}} for more information.)(Well there will be two instances if I push my patch https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2017-02/msg00986.html) I have tested that without it, 'make pdf' succeeds. IMHO the manual would be fine without this feature. As a consequence --to avoid adding complexity to the build process-- I would be in favour of not using @inlinefmtifelse until Automake distributes a compatible version in its current version. Perhaps the newly appointed Automake maintainer should do this! Please tell him :P But - yeah - if we don't have to wait to long before the next automake release, then maybe we should wait. What do others think? -- Avoid eavesdropping. Send strong encrypted email. PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3 fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285 A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3 See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
