Hi,
On 05/02/2011 05:02 PM, Don Simons wrote:
> I suggest trying to compile the document the old fashioned way, first with
> tex (or etex), then dvips, then convert to a pdf with gsview or ghostscript
> or acrobat if you really need a pdf. I know it doesn't answer the original
> question, but whether it satisfies you depends on your objectives.
>
> Personally I'm very wary of any S/W that bypasses dvips, because I always
> use postscript slurs rather than font-based (as I would recommend to
> everyone), and they may not appear in the final output.
That's completely fine, I'm not bound to any specific way of generating
a pdf or ps - I would just like to generate the documentation at all for
Debian since Debian insists of generating it from source instead of just
using the "binary" pdf version from WIMA.
Maybe my tex/etex approach as above suggested by you looks stupid but:
=====================================================================
OK, entering \batchmoderst@host001:~/temp/debian/m-tx-0.60d/doc$ tex
mtxdoc.tex
This is TeX, Version 3.1415926 (TeX Live 2009/Debian)
(./mtxdoc.tex
! Undefined control sequence.
l.1 \documentclass
[11pt]{article}
? q
OK, entering \batchmoderst@host001:~/temp/debian/m-tx-0.60d/doc$ etex
mtxdoc.tex
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.1415926-1.40.10 (TeX Live 2009/Debian)
entering extended mode
(./mtxdoc.tex
! Undefined control sequence.
l.1 \documentclass
[11pt]{article}
? q
OK, entering \batchmoderst@host001:~/temp/debian/m-tx-0.60d/doc$
=====================================================================
Or how did I get you wrong? :-)
Thanks in advance,
Roland
-------------------------------
TeX-music@tug.org mailing list
If you want to unsubscribe or look at the archives, go to
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
