From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: Re: Internal links in LaTeX export Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:35:08 -0400 Message-ID: <18647.1288305308@alphaville.usa.hp.com> References: <54309AAF-34E2-47F9-9DF2-236DC9BBFA69@tsdye.com> <80y69i5avh.fsf@mundaneum.com> <8439CC4F-8895-43F1-BE6A-D8E5A491A908@tsdye.com> <81tyk6117u.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37693 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PBb3x-0007sN-0K for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:35:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PBb3v-0008Jp-El for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:35:12 -0400 Received: from g1t0026.austin.hp.com ([15.216.28.33]:4626) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PBb3v-0008JU-7J for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:35:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: Message from "Thomas S. Dye" of "Thu, 28 Oct 2010 11:19:19 -1000." List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: "Thomas S. Dye" Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9bastien_Vauban?= , nicholas.dokos@hp.com, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Jambunathan K Thomas S. Dye wrote: > On Oct 28, 2010, at 11:01 AM, Jambunathan K wrote: > > > This is a regression. release-7.01h is good. HEAD is bad. I get the > following line with release-7.01h. > > Links to \hyperref[sec-1]{Heading1} > > Jambunathan K. > > Aloha Jambunathan K., > > Very many thanks for this information. I have Org-mode version 7.01trans > (release_7.01h.880.g7531f). I take it the problem I'm having is due to a relatively recent change > to Org-mode. If there is anything I can do to help isolate the problem, please let me know. > Tom, If you have the time and the inclination, you might try bisecting your way through. Bisecting org-mode problems is actually a very good way to practice because the turnaround time is very small. Prerequisites: * you have a clone of the org-mode git repository. * you have an org test file. Steps: * [optional, but it makes me feel a little safer] create a test branch and switch to it: git checkout -b test-branch master * I clean out all the compiled files while doing a bisection: it's quicker than regenerating them every time and I don't have to worry (much) about emacs loading a wayward .elc file: make clean * start the bisection and tell git which commit is known good and which is known bad: git bisect start # current version is bad git bisect bad # release_7.01h was good - I got the name with ``git tag'' git bisect good release_7.01h That checks out a revision half-way in between the bad and good commits: since there are about 900 commits in between, you'll be at approx the 450-mark and it should take about 10 bisections to get it down to a single commit. * LOOP Now all you have to do is repeat the following steps: # since you did ``make clean'' you don't have to worry about .elc files # just reload all the .el files. M-x org-reload visit your org test file, export to LaTeX, check for \href/\hyperref (or whatever other telltale sign shows badness/goodness). # tell git about it git bisect good *OR* git bisect bad This last step will check out another revision and in about 10 repetitions of the loop, you are done. * Tell git you are done, so it can clean up: git bisect reset Theoretically, you could do all of this in your master branch without creating a test-branch and this last step will reset everything to the way it was before ``git start''. * Post the offending commit to the list. * Get back to your master branch: git checkout master * If you created a test-branch, clean it out: git branch -d test-branch * [Optional] Recreate your .elc files and reload them: make M-x org-reload And that's it: a half-hour of fun and games. Unless of course, you hit upon a revision that is neither good nor bad (in the above restricted sense): you might get some other problem that prevents you from being able to answer. That might or might not be easy to resolve, so I'll leave that as an advanced topic (truth be told, I came up against this situation a couple of days ago and I didn't know how to proceed: so it's ignorance more than anything else that prevents me from saying anything more). If you want to try, I'd be happy to answer questions - I might try the bisection later on tonight myself in any case. And btw, this is of course archeology of a different (and much easier) kind, so I imagine you'll take to it like a fish in water :-) HTH, Nick