Re: Problem building 9.0 Beta 3 US PDF file
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Problem building 9.0 Beta 3 US PDF file |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6491.1278731951@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Problem building 9.0 Beta 3 US PDF file (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-docs |
I wrote: > Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= <devrim@gunduz.org> writes: >> I could build 9.0 Beta 3 A4 PDF without any issues, but I think something is broken in US PDF generation: >> This is pdfTeXk, Version 3.141592-1.40.3 (Web2C 7.5.6) >> %&-line parsing enabled. >> entering extended mode >> ! I can't find file `postgres-US.tex-pdf'. >> <*> postgres-US.tex-pdf > Hm. I'm not seeing that (on Fedora 13), but what I am seeing is that it > grinds for awhile and then fails with > [379.0.22 > ! pdfTeX error (ext4): \pdfendlink ended up in different nesting level than \pdfstartlink. > <to be read again> > \endgroup \set@typeset@protect > l.280599 {1}} > You will want to use a version of GCC subsequent to 3.3.2, > ! ==> Fatal error occurred, no output PDF file produced! > Transcript written on postgres-US.log. > make: *** [postgres-US.pdf] Error 1 I find that removing the AIX-fixlevels table (and the two references to it) from installation.sgml makes the postgres-US.pdf build go through on my F-13 box. This is pretty weird, since there's nothing obviously wrong with that table; and if there were something wrong with it, why doesn't it bother the postgres-A4.pdf build? Seems like we must be looking at a strange toolchain bug. Now, ordinarily I wouldn't suggest removing information from the manual, but I'm not sure that that table is worth fighting the toolchain for. It was added here http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2009-06/msg00197.php on the basis of Laurenz Albe's suggestion here http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-06/msg00884.php but I don't know how carefully that was researched. I'm tempted to propose going back to the "use the latest fixpack" wording that was there before. Comments? Can anyone else reproduce the behavior I'm seeing? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: