[texworks] Deleting bbl as an Aux file

Vladimir Lomov lomov.vl at gmail.com
Tue Jan 31 01:24:33 CET 2012

** Stefan Löffler [2012-01-30 20:15:37 +0100]:

> Hi,

> On 2012-01-30 19:49, Alain Delmotte wrote:

>>> Putting this topic up for broader discussion, I'd be interested to hear
>>> what people on this list think about adding .bbl files to the "remove
>>> auxiliary files" list by default. I usually get them from BiBTeX, but
>>> are there workflows where they are not generated automatically during
>>> typesetting (e.g., written by hand, or produced by other applications
>>> that are not usually run together with LaTeX)? If so, it would be bad to
>>> offer to delete them by default, otherwise it might be worthwhile.

>> But when one ask to delete the auxiliary files, one has a dialog box
>> where you can select what to delete and what not.

>> Or am I wrong?

> You're right. But what is listed there is customizable (through
> <resources>/configuration/texworks-config.txt). After all, you wouldn't
> want, say, .tex files ending up there, and Tw doesn't know about file
> types (for it, all files are text or image files).

I'm agree, though I didn't know it is possible to customize list of
'removed auxiliary files'.

> So, the question is: should we add .bbl files to that list, or could
> they be non-auxiliary files (under some usual workflow)?

Sometimes bbl file shouldn't be deleted, e.g. I have BibTeX database
for articles and book, but for some paper requires a bit changed
referencing style. I do usual things, '\cite', processing file, getting
'bbl' one and edit it by hand (actually redefine a command) to get
proper reference style.

WBR, Vladimir Lomov

It is true that if your paperboy throws your paper into the bushes for five
straight days it can be explained by Newton's Law of Gravity.  But it takes
Murphy's law to explain why it is happening to you.

More information about the texworks mailing list