From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Browning Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: flymake and filenames matching [0-9]+.tex Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:10:17 -0600 Message-ID: <87pqt9dmxy.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> References: <87y68f7vhq.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> <2h7hfyikbx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292037032 31611 80.91.229.12 (11 Dec 2010 03:10:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 03:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 11 04:10:28 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PRFqt-0002tb-Pv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Dec 2010 04:10:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57650 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PRFqt-0007Bh-3u for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 22:10:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37308 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PRFqo-00079x-70 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 22:10:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PRFqm-0003zQ-4h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 22:10:22 -0500 Original-Received: from defaultvalue.org ([70.85.129.156]:33017) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PRFqm-0003zE-1Y; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 22:10:20 -0500 Original-Received: from omen.defaultvalue.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4F2590D34; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:10:17 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from raven.defaultvalue.org (raven.defaultvalue.org [192.168.1.7]) by omen.defaultvalue.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D3F950107; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:10:17 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by raven.defaultvalue.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4337A7BA9F8; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:10:17 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <2h7hfyikbx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (Glenn Morris's message of "Sat, 27 Nov 2010 15:26:58 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:133599 Archived-At: Glenn Morris writes: > I suspect whoever wrote that used the convention: > > master.tex: > %% This is the master file. > > %% These are included files. These cannot be latex'd directly, > %% instead latex the main file. > \input{chapter1.tex} > \input{chapter2.tex} > > Who knows how widespread that convention is, but since it is a > defcustom, anyone can change their personal setting. > > It seems a bit limited, since eg it does not work for \include as well > (easily fixed though), and it does not work if the .tex extension is > omitted from the \input command. So would you say this should be considered a bug or intended behavior? I'm just trying to determine the appropriate way to handle the original report. Thanks -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4