From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: new exporter Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:08:57 +0200 Message-ID: <87394s23dy.fsf@gnu.org> References: <3C38420E-E2FA-4CAB-B3FD-9C5F8584E60A@gmail.com> <81fwadrgoo.fsf@gmail.com> <87396dzlai.fsf_-_@Rainer.invalid> <871ulqgb4t.fsf@gmail.com> <87y5nyx4ku.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87a9zq7htj.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87r4t261fw.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87k3yu15wj.fsf@gmail.com> <87395hkj7u.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87fw9gwmet.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87pq8j2a0y.fsf@gmail.com> <87r4sy3rve.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87fw9d1eif.fsf@gmail.com> <878veo6d1a.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87d340u077.fsf@gmail.com> <87ipdrpl5n.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87liimfh5l.fsf@gmail.com> <87a9z1kz9r.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87vcho7qi3.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60201) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SqV7B-0006Ec-0f for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Jul 2012 16:08:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SqV7A-0003OY-6K for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Jul 2012 16:08:24 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com ([209.85.212.177]:41793) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SqV79-0003OG-Vf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 15 Jul 2012 16:08:24 -0400 Received: by wibhm11 with SMTP id hm11so1636843wib.12 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2012 13:08:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87vcho7qi3.fsf@gmail.com> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of "Sun, 15 Jul 2012 21:50:44 +0200") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Nicolas Goaziou Cc: Achim Gratz , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Unfortunately, there's now an > > "(invalid function org-export-with-current-buffer-copy)" > > error when using make test Mhh.. just tried now and I don't have this error. A leftover from the previously loaded definition maybe? -- Bastien