headers
Sebastian Luque | 1 Jul 2005 03:11
Picon
Gravatar

minibuffer message after C-c C-c

Dear List,

I've recently changed my LaTeX system from Debian teTeX to TeX-live, which
I installed on my Debian box.

> kpsewhich -expand-var '$TEXMF'
{/home/sluque/texmf, !!/usr/local/share/texmf-var,
/usr/local/share/texmf-local, !!/usr/local/share/texmf,
!!/usr/local/share/texmf-dist}

The system is working ok, but I noticed that when I do C-c C-c after
editing a source file, the message that usually appears:

Type `C-c C-l' to display results of compilation.

remains in the minibuffer indefinitely, whereas this only happened when
there was some error before changing the system. Files are processed
without problems for either dvi or pdf output, but I'd just like to know
what is going on, for peace of mind. I'm using the Debian auctex package
11.55-2 and GNU Emacs 21.4.1 (i386-pc-linux-gnu, X toolkit, Xaw3d scroll
bars) of 2005-03-17 on trouble, modified by Debian.

Thank you,
--

-- 
Sebastian P. Luque
Permalink | Reply | 501 comments |
headers
Ralf Angeli | 1 Jul 2005 10:21
Picon

Re: minibuffer message after C-c C-c

* Sebastian Luque (2005-07-01) writes:

> The system is working ok, but I noticed that when I do C-c C-c after
> editing a source file, the message that usually appears:
>
> Type `C-c C-l' to display results of compilation.
>
> remains in the minibuffer indefinitely, whereas this only happened when
> there was some error before changing the system.

Do you get a backtrace if you do a LaTeX run and type `M-x
toggle-debug-on-error RET' before starting it?  (See also the answer
to the question "Why doesn't AUCTeX signal when processing a document
is done?" in the FAQ section of the manual.)

Are there any suspicious (error) messages in the output buffer
(accessible with `C-c C-l') or the *Messages* buffer?

Are you able to observe the problem if you start Emacs with `emacs -q
-no-site-file', type `M-: (require 'tex-site) RET', open a LaTeX file,
and compile it?

--

-- 
Ralf
Permalink | Reply | 503 comments |
headers
Sebastian Luque | 1 Jul 2005 18:30
Picon
Gravatar

Re: minibuffer message after C-c C-c

Ralf Angeli <angeli <at> iwi.uni-sb.de> wrote:

[...]

> Do you get a backtrace if you do a LaTeX run and type `M-x
> toggle-debug-on-error RET' before starting it?  (See also the answer
> to the question "Why doesn't AUCTeX signal when processing a document
> is done?" in the FAQ section of the manual.)

Unfortunately, none of these gives me a backtrace.

> Are there any suspicious (error) messages in the output buffer
> (accessible with `C-c C-l') or the *Messages* buffer?

Nope, it occurs even in the simplest documents, where there are no errors
in the output buffer, nor in *Messages*. I may have to try my init options
a block at a time to spot this (see below).

> Are you able to observe the problem if you start Emacs with `emacs -q
> -no-site-file', type `M-: (require 'tex-site) RET', open a LaTeX file,
> and compile it?

Here there's no problems, I get the "successfully formatted" message at
the end.

Thanks a lot.

--

-- 
Sebastian P. Luque
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Sebastian Luque | 1 Jul 2005 19:30
Picon
Gravatar

Re: minibuffer message after C-c C-c

I had the line:

(add-hook 'LaTeX-mode-hook #'LaTeX-preview-setup)

somewhere in ~/.emacs, but my preview-latex-style package had been removed
together with the tetex packages due to dependence. Everything works fine
without loading preview-latex now. I'm surprised I didn't get an error
when opening a latex source file with that hook.

I suppose I'll have to compile preview-latex myself now.

Thanks,
Sebastian

Ralf Angeli <angeli <at> iwi.uni-sb.de> wrote:
> * Sebastian Luque (2005-07-01) writes:
>
>> The system is working ok, but I noticed that when I do C-c C-c after
>> editing a source file, the message that usually appears:
>>
>> Type `C-c C-l' to display results of compilation.
>>
>> remains in the minibuffer indefinitely, whereas this only happened when
>> there was some error before changing the system.
>
> Do you get a backtrace if you do a LaTeX run and type `M-x
> toggle-debug-on-error RET' before starting it?  (See also the answer
> to the question "Why doesn't AUCTeX signal when processing a document
> is done?" in the FAQ section of the manual.)
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
David Kastrup | 3 Jul 2005 12:21
Picon
Picon

Re: Problem?

Ralf Angeli <angeli <at> iwi.uni-sb.de> writes:

> * David Kastrup (2005-07-03) writes:
>
>> Hm, so for XEmacs, the default of the variable is different, but for
>> Emacs 21.3, the code ignores the setting?
>>
>> Isn't that kind of inconsistent?
>
> The idea was that Emacs 21 users at least get the font scaling.

I seem to remember a number of complaints that this was extremely
confusing without raising/lowering.  I thought we had changed this to
not do anything on Emacs 21.  Checking this with an actual Emacs 21, I
find that indeed this is not so.

So I want to ask on the auctex list: are there any users of Emacs-21,
AUCTeX and font-lock around?

If there are: do you use the default setting of
font-latex-fontify-script, or have you changed it?  If you did not
change it: Do you consider its effects helpful or have you just not
bothered?

--

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Svend Tollak Munkejord | 3 Jul 2005 14:13
X-Face

Re: Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Problem?

On 2005-07-03, David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> Ralf Angeli <angeli <at> iwi.uni-sb.de> writes:
>
>> * David Kastrup (2005-07-03) writes:
>>
>>> Hm, so for XEmacs, the default of the variable is different, but for
>>> Emacs 21.3, the code ignores the setting?
>>>
>>> Isn't that kind of inconsistent?
>>
>> The idea was that Emacs 21 users at least get the font scaling.
>
> I seem to remember a number of complaints that this was extremely
> confusing without raising/lowering.  I thought we had changed this to
> not do anything on Emacs 21.  Checking this with an actual Emacs 21, I
> find that indeed this is not so.
>
> So I want to ask on the auctex list: are there any users of Emacs-21,
> AUCTeX and font-lock around?

Hello :-)

> If there are: do you use the default setting of
> font-latex-fontify-script, or have you changed it?

I use (setq font-latex-fontify-script nil), since I often use long
superscripts and subscripts (i.e., long in terms of characters in the
.tex file), and I think it is more readable to have everything
full-size.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Christian Schlauer | 4 Jul 2005 12:13
Picon
Favicon

Re: Problem?

David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> writes:

[...]

> So I want to ask on the auctex list: are there any users of Emacs-21,
> AUCTeX and font-lock around?

Oh yes.

> If there are: do you use the default setting of
> font-latex-fontify-script, or have you changed it?  If you did not
> change it: Do you consider its effects helpful or have you just not
> bothered?

I have `(setq font-latex-fontify-script nil)' in my .emacs. It has to
do with the font size, too, which is too small. I brought this up on
<URL:http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs/4202>. The
problem is described in
<URL:http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs/4480>. In that
thread, everybody agrees that rounding up would be worth a try, but
nothing has changed, I believe.

--

-- 
Christian Schlauer
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Sebastian Luque | 4 Jul 2005 14:55
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Problem?

David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> wrote:

[...]

> So I want to ask on the auctex list: are there any users of Emacs-21,
> AUCTeX and font-lock around?

Yes indeed!

>
> If there are: do you use the default setting of
> font-latex-fontify-script, or have you changed it?  If you did not
> change it: Do you consider its effects helpful or have you just not
> bothered?

One of the reasons I adore AUCTeX, among numerous others, is the excellent
default values it provides. The default font-latex-fontify-script is one
of those; it considerably improves readability of the source.

I take the opportunity to congratulate all AUCTeX developers for your
efforts with this wonderful program! My productivity and pleasure while
working with LaTeX has improved so much thanks to you.

--

-- 
Sebastian P. Luque
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
David Kastrup | 4 Jul 2005 15:26
Picon
Picon

Re: [AUCTeX] Re: Problem?

Sebastian Luque <spluque <at> gmail.com> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> So I want to ask on the auctex list: are there any users of Emacs-21,
>> AUCTeX and font-lock around?
>
> Yes indeed!
>
>> If there are: do you use the default setting of
>> font-latex-fontify-script, or have you changed it?  If you did not
>> change it: Do you consider its effects helpful or have you just not
>> bothered?
>
> One of the reasons I adore AUCTeX, among numerous others, is the
> excellent default values it provides. The default
> font-latex-fontify-script is one of those; it considerably improves
> readability of the source.

And for you the improvement of readability is still noticeable even
given that the fontification on Emacs-21 does not differentiate
between subscripts and superscripts?

Sorry to be asking again; I just want to make sure that we are not
accidentally talking about different things.

> I take the opportunity to congratulate all AUCTeX developers for
> your efforts with this wonderful program! My productivity and
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Sebastian Luque | 4 Jul 2005 19:38
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Re: [AUCTeX] Re: Problem?

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 15:26:25 +0200,
David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> wrote:

[...]

> And for you the improvement of readability is still noticeable even
> given that the fontification on Emacs-21 does not differentiate
> between subscripts and superscripts?

Yes, I get a slightly smaller font for sub-/superscripts in my system, and
that is enough of a clue for me to continue reading. If I wished more than
that, I'd use preview-latex altogether.

Cheers,
--

-- 
Sebastian P. Luque
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane