From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Schmitt Subject: Re: export_file_name problem with new exporter Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:03:32 +0100 Message-ID: References: , <8738zadrpn.fsf@gmail.com>, , <87y5h2cbao.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47702) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tj9Nz-0006W7-FX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:03:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tj9Nv-00056I-8C for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:03:39 -0500 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.82]:39318) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tj9Nv-000566-1x for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:03:35 -0500 In-reply-to: <87y5h2cbao.fsf@gmail.com> 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 Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Alan Schmitt writes: > >> I understand it. What I actually would like is to be able to specify a >> different "working directory". Right now it defaults to the directory >> where the org file is, but it's often not satisfactory (especially when >> compilation creates additional files). Would this be difficult to add? > > That is the purpose of publishing, as discussed in this thread. Not really: looking at the code, publishing does all its work in the current directory, then moves the final file to its place (leaving all the mess compilation made behind). I understand the reason for such a thing: publishing should only publish the final result. In other words, I see three places of interest: - where the org file is - where export and compilation occurs - where the final result is put Publishing lets us deal with the last one, but I don't think there is a way to distinguish between the first two. > Btw, please commit your changes to org-e-beamer.el when you have > validated your FSF papers. By "validating", do you mean that I have received them back signed from the FSF? (I signed and sent them a few weeks ago, still waiting to get them back ...) Alan