# [texhax] Why ... ?

Daniel Savard dsavard at cids.ca
Sun Aug 31 19:23:43 CEST 2003

Le sam 30/08/2003 à 19:10, Robin Fairbairns a écrit :
> daniel savard writes:
>
> > Le sam 30/08/2003 à 15:45, Herbert Gintis a écrit :
> > > At 06:46 PM 8/29/2003 +0200, Kastelan Kastelan wrote:
> > > >  I'm sorry to bother you. I have only one question to you:
> > > >
> > > >  I've tried to put a picture into my Tex-document, but I can see only
> > > > boxed place, where  the picture should be. Where is the problem?
> > >          You have to convert the .dvi file to a postscript (.ps) file or
> > > Acrobat (.pdf) file to see the eps file.
> >
> > I'm not sure this is exact. Seems to depend on the tool you are using to
> > display DVI files. I've just tested with the actual .eps file from the
> > original poster and I am able to see everything, including PostScript
> > graphics content with xdvi on Linux. However, there is a mode to make
> > the tool skipping PostScript contents, in you tool or the original
> > poster tool, it may be off by default.
>
> but it doesn't explain a "box" in the output, as kastelan reports.
>

Yes, it might have explained it, right now we know the package graphicx
was missing in it's TeX source. However, xdvi will replace the actual
graphics by an empty box of the size of the picture which is supposed to
be displayed. This is somewhat similar to the draft mode, without having
to change anything in your source file and without any label inside the
box.

> does this box have the picture file name inside it?  if so, it's
> because the graphics package is picking up a draft option from
> somewhere.  load the package with option final (regardless of whether
> there's draft on the document class):
>
>   \usepackage[final]{graphicx}
>
> and i would guess everything will be all right.
>
--

=======================================
Daniel Savard
Consultation Informatique Daniel Savard

=======================================