On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:
> do you mean one large html page, vs. many smaller ones?
Yes.
--
William F Hammond
Email: gel...@gmail.com
https://www.facebook.com/william.f.hammond
http://www.albany.edu/~hammond/
Hi Karl,
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Karl Berry wrote:
> I'm not sure if you determined if all of this is a dvisvgm bug,
> but if not:
>
> Here is a MWE, which shows the issue. What happens is that
> DVI creates corrupted DVI file or has an error making the dvi.
>
> When dviluatex (o
I'm not sure if you determined if all of this is a dvisvgm bug,
but if not:
Here is a MWE, which shows the issue. What happens is that
DVI creates corrupted DVI file or has an error making the dvi.
When dviluatex (or any engine) creates a corrupted DVI file (i.e.,
dvitype cannot successfu
On 1/1/2016 3:34 PM, Michal Hoftich wrote:
I am using Fedora 23, but binaries are provided by TL, so it should be
identical. Could anyone else report their results?
There is 32 vs. 64 bit os. I am on 64 bit. if you are on 32 bit OS,
You are using TL 2015 but 32 bit. this might be a differenc
>
> No. dvisvgm needs to be build from sources for Linux which I
> did not do. Still using TL 2015 version. 1.9.2 as is.
>
I have the same version
>
> You might be using different build of dvisvgm, i.e. different OS
> and this could cause this difference?
>
I am using Fedora 23, but binaries are
On 1/1/2016 3:08 PM, Michal Hoftich wrote:
Thanks but I am not getting the core dump on my end? TL 2015
fresh update.
That's weird, I have freshly updated TL as well..
If you like me to try something else, please let me know.
I've got the SIGSEGV error also with your sample file
That is
> Thanks but I am not getting the core dump on my end? TL 2015
> fresh update.
>
That's weird, I have freshly updated TL as well..
>
> If you like me to try something else, please let me know.
I've got the SIGSEGV error also with your sample file
>
> btw, there is new version of dvisvgm by Marti
On 1/1/2016 11:36 AM, William F Hammond wrote:
Happy New Year!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Michal Hoftich wrote:
. . . The solution I gave to Nasser is
fragile, every sectioning command used in the document must be
reconfigured.
While generally I prefer unified html documents (if only
On 1/1/2016 5:31 AM, Michal Hoftich wrote:
Hi Nasser,
it seems that it is caused by the xfrac package. A really minimal
example is following:
\documentclass[12pt]{report}%
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{xfrac}
\begin{document}
\[ \sfrac{a}{b} \]
\end{document}
Happy New Year!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Michal Hoftich wrote:
> . . . The solution I gave to Nasser is
> fragile, every sectioning command used in the document must be
> reconfigured.
>
While generally I prefer unified html documents (if only because searching
is easier), my thought abo
Hi Nasser,
it seems that it is caused by the xfrac package. A really minimal
example is following:
\documentclass[12pt]{report}%
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{xfrac}
\begin{document}
\[ \sfrac{a}{b} \]
\end{document}
compiled with
latex minimal.tex
dvisvgm mini
Hi Nasser,
it seems that animate package writes something into the dvi file,
which causes dvisvgm to terminate with fatal error. As it is declaring
it directly when the package is loaded, we can't disable it from a
.4ht file.
Easy fix is to include it conditionally only when compiling into PDF.
A
Ahh, thats my bad.
The new .mk4 file for handling svg files is wrong, there are blank
pages in the .idv file, which result in blank svg, we should copy only
pages requested in the .lg file. The problem from your earlier mail
must be really caused by the wrong fonts in the dvi file.
I am sorry for
> Seems like before the section number would be better.
> What's the advantage of moving to after the number?
> Just seems confusing.
Yes it would be better, even better would be to use `id` attributes on
header elements. It The problem is that the current behavior is pretty
hardcoded and lots of
14 matches
Mail list logo
