Re: Re: Internal links in LaTeX export

[Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>]

Thomas

There was a hint at possible solution (or atleast a partial solution) in
my original post. Did you try it before jumping in to rough waters or
digging deeper?

Do 

,----
| M-x customize-variable RET org-export-latex-hyperref-format' 
`----

so that your .emacs has an entry like this

,---- [.emacs]
| 
| (custom-set-variables
|  '(org-export-latex-hyperref-format "\\hyperref[%s]{%s}"))
| 
`----

The above setting solves the problem for me with the following simple
Org file.

* Heading1
  Make this section as large as possible so that it fills atleast a
  page.

* Heading2
  Links to [[Heading1]]

Jambunathan K.

"Thomas S. Dye" <tsd@tsdye.com> writes:

> On Oct 28, 2010, at 12:35 PM, Nick Dokos wrote:
>
>> Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> 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
>
> Hi Nick,
>
> Irresistible hook at the end there.  I wish this stuff were as easy as
> archaeology is for me.  Your instructions are terrific, though.
>
> I did hit on a revision that was neither good nor bad:
>
> commit 8562273b272024a630a582b0e1b94c481d8abeec
> Author: Eric Schulte <schulte.eric@gmail.com>
> Date:   Sat Oct 16 13:21:47 2010 -0600
>
>     ob-ref: don't forget arguments to referenced code blocks
>
>     * lisp/ob-ref.el (org-babel-ref-resolve): bringing the referent
>       arguments back to their params before evaluation
>
> This one puts these lines in *Messages* when I export to LaTeX
>
> executing Org code block...
> if: Symbol's value as variable is void: result-type
>
> I tried using different commits for the initial git bisect good,
> hoping that would skip by the problem, but this one appears to have
> stuck around a while.  My other two tries both ended with this same
> error, but with different commits.
>
> I'm not sure what to do next.  This problem isn't yielding to my
> archaeo-logic. :)
>
> All the best,
> Tom