On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 09:47:47PM +0000, Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2017-04-28, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > Attached is an MWE and my log. Can you attach your log so we can see why > > I get an error and you do not? > > > > I wonder if I have an older version of an > > important file. This has happened before since I have installed many > > extra packages and sometimes those packages unfortunately bundle old > > versions of dependencies. > > I see a difference here: > > Your log: > > > (/usr/local/texlive/texmf-local/tex/UbuntuTexDir/latex/html/latin9.def > > File: latin1.def 1998/03/05 v0.97 Input encoding file(test version: still > > liable > > to change) > > My log: > > (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/latin9.def > File: latin9.def 2015/03/17 v1.2c Input encoding file > ) > > The file used at your side has a strange path... > I wonder what else is in the ...latex/html (!) dir
Thank you for comparing!
The directory
/usr/local/texlive/texmf-local/tex/UbuntuTexDir/
is a symbolic link (that I created) to:
/usr/share/texmf/tex/
The command
ls /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/html/
gives:
floatflt.ins
heqn.sty
htmllist.sty
justify.sty
ldump.sty
verbatimfiles.sty
frames.sty
hthtml.sty
html.sty
latin9.def
techexplHTML.tex
I think I created the symbolic link because I wanted some .sty files in
Ubuntu packages to be found that are not in TeX Live.
> and where it does come
> from.
Indeed,
$ dpkg -S latin9.def
gives
latex2html: /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/html/latin9.def
A relevant difference from the command
$ diff /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/html/latin9.def \
/usr/local/texlive/2016/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/latin9.def
is
< %\DeclareInputText{176}{\textdegree}
---
> \DeclareInputText{176}{\textdegree}
After removing the old latin9.def file, the test
"doc/UserGuide_pdf5_texF"
is now passing, and I imagine the others. I will check tonight.
I am interested in making a bug report for the latex2html package. Do
you agree that the latex2html package should not package latin9.def,
neither old nor new? The package latex2html depends on the package
texlive-latex-recommended which in turn depends on texlive-base, which
contains latin9.def. Does that argument seem reasonable?
Thanks,
Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
