[tex4ht] [bug #126] Please resume support for biblatex
joanna.j at gmail.com
Sat Apr 3 09:39:46 CEST 2010
I actually glanced through all the other scripts that had been built in
/usr/texbin by whichever install process brought me my current version of
livetex (which includes htlatex). I didn't see any other obvious examples
of naked calls to latex from a bourne shell. With luck, the perl programs
etc. grab the right environment variables. Anything invoked from TexShop
has the right "engine" set from preferences.
I agree it's possible but I think unlikely given your install scripts that
there will be a htlatex installed somewhere that there isn't the appropriate
latex. At least, I *think* that would be less likely than someone having
multiple latexs installed, but I could be wrong.
Anyway, good luck with your release.
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 12:48 AM, Karl Berry <karl at freefriends.org> wrote:
> attached a version of htlatex that does the right thing (calls the
> latex in the same directory as it). Obviously it would be useful to
> have the same patch on quite a lot of other script files...
> Although we could change the tex4ht scripts, there's a fundamental issue
> that if the tex programs found along PATH do not match what's being
> invoked, there can be problems. It's never been possible to say
> /some/path/latex foo.tex and have everything work perfectly in all
> circumstances. Unfortunately.
> Still, I suppose any improvement in this regard is good, so we'll look
> at this before we make the next release. (Right now I am stuck at not
> being able to regenerate some files from sources, so no reliable release
> is possible, sigh.)
> P.S. Also, the change is not quite so simple. If latex doesn't
> exist in BASEDIR, it should still be looked for in PATH, since some
> people might well have tex4ht and latex installed in different
> directories. tex4t and t4ht should be invoked from BASEDIR, though.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tex4ht