From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Harkins Subject: Re: Bad footnotes when including org files Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 01:32:52 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <5324E5F1.5080207@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55160) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOzxE-00070i-09 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 21:33:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOzx6-0004bl-MP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 21:33:31 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:36605) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WOzx6-0004bf-F1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 21:33:24 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WOzx4-00018H-DD for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 02:33:22 +0100 Received: from 113.109.22.44 ([113.109.22.44]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 02:33:22 +0100 Received: from jamshark70 by 113.109.22.44 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 02:33:22 +0100 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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Xavier Garrido gmail.com> writes: > > Hi Orgers, > > I am having some troubles with several org files that I want to include > into one general org file. To do that I use the #+INCLUDE: keywords and > actually, everything is working well until I add some footnotes in both > files. Let me show you a minimal example where the footnote numbering is > getting weird > > When I export to LaTeX the latest file, I get two footnotes with the > same number. The problem can be solved by changing the label of the > second footnote to [fn:2] but it means that I have to reorganize and > reorder footnotes within all the org files I will include. I am > wondering if it is possible to run, for example, > =org-footnote-renumber-fn:N= function when including files in such way > the user will not have to take care footnote labels. I had exactly this problem in a big project. Poking around the customization group org-footnote, I found: Org Footnote Auto Label: Value Menu Create a random label State: SAVED and set. Non-nil means define automatically new labels for footnotes. Possible values are: nil Prompt the user for each label. t Create unique labels of the form [fn:1], [fn:2], etc. confirm Like t, but let the user edit the created value. The label can be removed from the minibuffer to create an anonymous footnote. random Automatically generate a unique, random label. plain Automatically create plain number labels like [1]. I switched to random labels, and no problem since then. I don't find any evidence of a function that will automatically switch existing footnotes to random IDs, though, and I'm afraid I'm short of time this morning. It should be possible, but I guess nobody has done it. But, do set the custom var to use random labels. It will prevent the problem for all new footnotes. hjh