tuation (just for my
reference) would also be helpful.
Regards, Faheem Mitha
##
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage{filecontents}
\usepackage{shellesc}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{pdfpages}
\beg
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014, Mosè Giordano wrote:
Hi Tassilo,
2014-06-25 23:18 GMT+02:00 Tassilo Horn :
I'll do that when I find some spare time after my move which might take
another week or two. Mosè, if you want, you can also do it whenever you
want.
Ok, I can help, just let me now what I've t
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014, Tassilo Horn wrote:
Faheem Mitha writes:
But as said: if someone volunteers to figure out how to get AUCTeX
into debbugs.gnu.org, please do so. It's probably not too hard.
Well, I could potentially do it, but wouldn't some official person
need to sign of
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014, Tassilo Horn wrote:
Faheem Mitha writes:
Hi Faheem,
The bug-auctex mailing list (aka the gmane.emacs.auctex.bugs
newsgroup) is the official AUCTeX bug tracker.
It's kind of hard to track bugs there.
I don't think it's so much harder to use than de
Hi Tassilo,
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Tassilo Horn wrote:
Faheem Mitha writes:
Hi Faheem,
I'm currently in the process of moving to another house, so my AUCTeX
development time is almost non-existent. I'll come back to you and this
bug anytime soon.
No problem. I appreciate you
On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:54:59 +0100, Johannes wrote:
> --20cf303f6dcec3f80404f4f1ce2a
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> The attached file will not produce correct preview, but instead
> replace the inline ath with an entire page.
> I also posted this to
> (http://tex.stackexchange.
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Norbert Preining wrote:
On So, 20 Mär 2011, Faheem Mitha wrote:
Since squeeze has now been released, it might be a plan to fix
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=610714
Good idea, please contact the maintainer of auctex for an NMU.
THe debian-tex-maint
Hi everyone,
Since squeeze has now been released, it might be a plan to fix
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=610714
for Debian squeeze. Problems from users continue to be reported. Some of
these people probably think they are doing something wrong, understandably
assuming Deb
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Ralf Angeli wrote:
* Faheem Mitha (2011-01-22) writes:
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Ralf Angeli wrote:
Maybe the Debian Ghostscript 8.71 package contains a patch which
introduced the behavior of the newer versions in the old one.
Maybe. Since the cvs patch was written by
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Ralf Angeli wrote:
* Faheem Mitha (2011-01-22) writes:
I've seen reports that ghostscript 11.71 works for
people. Not sure why, since as you can see from the report, it doesn't
work for me.
Maybe the Debian Ghostscript 8.71 package contains a patch which
Dear Auctex people,
I'm not telling anyone here anything they don't know, but just for the
record...
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=610714
Comments welcomed. I've seen reports that ghostscript 11.71 works for
people. Not sure why, since as you can see from the report, it d
11 matches
Mail list logo
