Philip Kaludercic writes: > Joseph Turner writes: > >> Hello! >> >> Because package-vc--build-documentation exports the texinfo manual to a >> temp file inside /tmp/ , any @include statements with relative paths >> break the makeinfo call. >> >> I noticed this issue when attempting to use package-vc to install >> org-transclusion, whose manual contains the line >> >> #+texinfo: @include fdl.texi >> >> See: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nobiot/org-transclusion/main/docs/org-transclusion-manual.org >> >> The attached patch solves this problem by passing the -I flag to >> makeinfo. From makeinfo --help: >> >> -I DIR append DIR to the @include search path. > > Good catch, this should be applied to emacs-29. > >> Best, >> >> Joseph >> >> From a41abce88ed3b833c5531208945474c9cd16284b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Joseph Turner >> Date: Sat, 6 May 2023 14:49:43 -0700 >> Subject: [PATCH] Fix: (package-vc--build-documentation) Relative @include >> statements >> >> --- >> lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el | 5 ++++- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el >> index 489610e2a1e..63c10285ca7 100644 >> --- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el >> +++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/package-vc.el >> @@ -381,6 +381,7 @@ FILE can be an Org file, indicated by its \".org\" extension, >> otherwise it's assumed to be an Info file." >> (let* ((pkg-name (package-desc-name pkg-desc)) >> (default-directory (package-desc-dir pkg-desc)) >> + (docs-directory (expand-file-name (file-name-directory file))) >> (output (expand-file-name (format "%s.info" pkg-name))) >> clean-up) >> (when (string-match-p "\\.org\\'" file) >> @@ -395,7 +396,9 @@ otherwise it's assumed to be an Info file." >> (erase-buffer) >> (cond >> ((/= 0 (call-process "makeinfo" nil t nil >> - "--no-split" file "-o" output)) >> + "-I" docs-directory > > According to the docs, makeinfo has -I to append the search path, and -P > to prepend. I don't know how well either of the two are supported, but > assuming they are, shouldn't -P be preferred? Or wouldn't it have any > effect? I am not sure what difference it would make. I don't know if the default @include search path includes anything besides the working directory. In the attached diff, I have changed -I to -P. >> + "--no-split" file >> + "-o" output)) >> (message "Failed to build manual %s, see buffer %S" >> file (buffer-name))) >> ((/= 0 (call-process "install-info" nil t nil