Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Test fails with TeXLive 2023 #105

Closed
tillea opened this issue Sep 4, 2023 · 11 comments
Closed

Test fails with TeXLive 2023 #105

tillea opened this issue Sep 4, 2023 · 11 comments

Comments

@tillea
Copy link

tillea commented Sep 4, 2023

Hi,
there is a bug report in Debian about a failure with TeXLive 2023. Just see the bug log and the attached workaround (which probably needs enhancement).
Kind regards, Andreas.

@bschilder
Copy link

bschilder commented Sep 4, 2023

Ah actually my previously reported issue seems to be more directly related to this! ☝️

179s   Running 'texi2dvi' on 'maketitle_test_1.tex' failed.
179s LaTeX errors:
179s ! LaTeX Error: Command \@raggedtwoe@everyselectfont undefined.

@bschilder
Copy link

@grimbough any thoughts on how to resolve this?

@hpreusse
Copy link

hpreusse commented Sep 14, 2023

With the patch described in Debian bug #1050807 the Bioconductor.sty becomes incompatible to ragged2e < v3.5. On the one hand one could make sure not to use the old ragged2e (if this is possible somehow) after applying the patch. On the other hand one could try to improve the patch by doing something like:

\ifdefined\@raggedtwoe@everyselectfont
  \renewcommand{\@raggedtwoe@everyselectfont}{%
  ...more lines
  <snip>
\else
  \newcommand{\@raggedtwoe@everyselectfont}{%
  ...more lines
  <snip>
\fi

This suggestion is untested.
Finally one could evaluate if the hack in Bioconductor.sty (which is 9 years old) is really still needed.

P.S.: this style file contains lots of \makeatletter / \makeatother pairs, which are really not meant to be there.

@grimbough
Copy link
Collaborator

Just confirming we also see this on our CI runs at: https://github.com/Bioconductor/BiocStyle/actions/runs/6185247528/job/16790480792

@bschilder
Copy link

bschilder commented Sep 14, 2023

Just confirming we also see this on our CI runs at: https://github.com/Bioconductor/BiocStyle/actions/runs/6185247528/job/16790480792

Aha, this is super helpful, it seems the pandoc version plays a big role here. Let me add pandoc_version as an arg in rworkflows. I'll make 2.17 the default for now, since that's the latest version that seems to be working.

@grimbough
Copy link
Collaborator

Those tests aren't comprehensive. They confound both tinytex & pandoc versions. Given the other reports here I'm sure it's the latest Tinytex (or texlive) version that is the issue

@bschilder
Copy link

Those tests aren't comprehensive. They confound both tinytex & pandoc versions. Given the other reports here I'm sure it's the latest Tinytex (or texlive) version that is the issue

Oh OK I see, pandoc 2.17 uses the tinytex 2022.01, thanks for pointing that out.

@grimbough
Copy link
Collaborator

grimbough commented Sep 14, 2023

Hopefully this is now solved in 0858890

I've no idea whether the issue the patch was trying to solve is still around, so for now I've elected to only apply they patch if we're using ragged2e version 3.5 or older. We'll see if anyone complains of unexpected rendering going forwards.

This fix should be available in both release and devel version of the package (2.28.1 and 2.29.2 respectively).

Thank you all for the pointers, please report here if it continues to be an issue.

@hpreusse
Copy link

Hopefully this is now solved in 0858890

I've afraid this is the wrong direction: with ragged2e later than 2023/04/03 the command \@raggedtwoe@everyselectfont does not exist any more and hence \renewcommand fails. See here.

@grimbough
Copy link
Collaborator

Isn't that what this line is doing?

\@ifpackagelater{ragged2e}{2023/06/01}{}{

If ragged2e is later than 2023-06-01 then it enters {} i.e. it does nothing, and if it's not later than 2023-06-01 it implements the old behaviour. Maybe I've misunderstood something.

@hpreusse
Copy link

You are correct, sorry I missed that {}.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants