"Bruce D'Arcus" <bdar...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 9:09 PM Scott Randby <sran...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> As a constant user of Org's LaTeX export capability, this change would break >> my ability to export to PDF, and it would be difficult for me to fix. I don't >> support this change. > > Can you explain this, Scott? Why would anything "break'? > > And for those that think this is a bad idea, suggested alternatives? > > With the status quo; new org-cite users will run latex/pdf output > process and will be surprised by the results, as there will be no > citations or bibliography. > > I suppose the easy solution is a prominent note in the documentation. > I'm guessing Scott is referring to the latexmk not being part of a 'standard' texlive installation and if not installed, pdf generation would fail. Yes, document the requirement would be my suggestion. There are a number of 'extensions' to basic org functionality which require additional prerequisites. For users of org-cite, one solution would be to document latexmk as a prerequisite. Another alternative would be to investigate if there is a better default for org-latex-pdf-program which does not require installation of latexmk or perhaps make the default more 'dynamic' - have it check for present of latexmk and if found, use it, otherwise use existing value. Big question IMO still needing to be answered is what is the situation with installation of latexmk on non GNU Linux based platforms. For example, how easy is it to install latexmk on a windows system? If installation of latexmk is trivial on all supported platforms, there is a higher chance of being able to make it the defualt. On the other hand, if you need to jump through a lot of hoops to get it running, making it the default is less likely. -- Tim Cross
