> Faheem Mitha <faheem@...> wrote:
>>>> I think that getting the fix into a point release ie. 6.1 as a
>>>> backport to 11.85 would be reasonable.
>>> I agree - delaying squeeze because of that would be ridiculous.
>> Right. So, what's the next step? Wait for the auctex maintainer?
>> Proceed with a unstable NMU? Something else?
> The usual thing with auctex would be to prepare an NMU, test it
> thoroughly, get some feedback and a better package; then upload it to
> the 10-days delayed queue. The next day, Davide (the so-called
> maintainer) will show up and say he'll fix it himself soon. About a day
> before your upload would enter unstable, he'll upload his version with a
> completely different approach to fixing things. Which might be better or
> even miss things, but will never be discussed.
> Or something like this. Still, if you don't prepare an NMU, chances are
> nothing's going to happen until, err, what's the successor of squeeze
> going to be called?
Heh. Well, that does sound like lots of fun. Unfortunately, as I wrote to
Julian Gilbey, I still seem to have breakage, even with this patch. If I
set TeX PDF mode to true, ie.
to your .emacs in custom-set-variables (usually set via customize),
preview breaks completely. With eg. C-c C-p C-d it seems to create one big
blank embedded png (or whatever) which covers the document entirely, with
the result that the document disappears. Yay.
With it off (ie regular latex mode), it works, but throws errors some of
the time. I guess I need to do more testing. Can you (or anyone else)
reproduce any of this? Again, I'm currently using 11.86 + that cvs patch.
My debs are publicly accessible (see earlier mesasage) in case anyone
wants to test.
I'm wondering if I should be CCing an auctex list with this stuff, and if
so, which one? General? Bugs?
Also, I've got a bunch of lists CCed. Anyone want me to take them off?
Frank, can I leave debian-tex-maint@... CCed?