Re: auctex preview.dvi build failure

On Wednesday 25 February 2009, David Kastrup wrote: > CVS version tags are used for versioning the released files. Obviously, > the format of your version control system tags differs, as do the actual > versions. So when LaTeX tries parsing the version control tags, the > unforeseen format throws it off the track. Thanks for the tip. I suppose changing the CVS keyword expansion mode in XEmacs packages CVS so that it doesn't do the expansion at all (now that they're already in, can be IIRC done after the fact with "cvs admin -ko ... ; cvs up") would fix it by keeping their values exactly as they were in the files that were checked in. But if I understand you correctly, that wouldn't satisfy this as I gather there might be some other differences in the versions shipped with the version in XEmacs packages collection: > It is important for diagnosing problems that the version is indicated as > not being the normal upstream version. How would you prefer this to be indicated? Something like appending "-XEmacs" to all relevant strings (see below) would be pretty easy to do, but I haven't checked if it'd play well with how the strings are parsed in the code.

For reference, attached is the list of CVS keywords in auctex from my checkout from the latest sumo tag. Based on a quick look, preview/latex/preview.dtx, preview/preview.el, and style/prosper.el contain these keywords somewhere else than in comments and would thus be primary candidates for -ko, but I don't see any harm in doing that for all files in auctex (or actually pretty much the whole packages CVS tree and making it the default for new files, but that's another discussion, possibly moot if the packages are being moved to another SCM in the nearish future).