Fwd: [Bug-AUCTeX] bug in tex-expand-list, 11.84-4

[Peter Olmsted]

OK, so it looks like the Auctex I downloaded via fink (from a mirror
somewhere) has the bug in it. To clarify: the version I downloaded
defines latex and tex in tex-command-list with the expansion string
 "%x", but this  expansion string isn't defined in tex-expand-list.

I did not add this myself. Removing reference to %x from the definitions
of tex and latex in tex-command-list now seem to work.

Cheers,

 - Peter        

> > Hi Ralf,
> >
> > Thanks for replying.
> >
> > On 22 Sep 2007, at 15:25, Ralf Angeli wrote:
> >
> > > * Peter Olmsted (2007-09-22) writes:
> > >
> > > > I have just installed the latest auctex, 11.84-4. Out of the box,
> > > > latex and tex are configured with a %x expansion character in tex-
> > > > command-list.  E.g.
> > > > as "latex %x  %t".
> > >
> > > Then either you or the people you got AUCTeX from defined it like
> > > this.
> > >
> > > > TeX-command-list '(("TeX" "tex  '\\nonstopmode\\input %t'" TeX-run-
> > > > TeX nil t)
> > > >                     ("TeX Interactive" "tex  %t" TeX-run-interactive nil t)
> > > >                     ("LaTeX" "latex  '\\nonstopmode\\input{%t}'"
> > > >                      TeX-run-LaTeX nil t)
> > >
> > > This has close to nothing in common with the default value of a
> > > vanilla
> > > AUCTeX 11.84 installation.  I suggest you remove the  
> > > customization you
> > > have for `TeX-command-list'.
> > >
> > > If removing the customization does not work, you likely have old  
> > > files
> > > lying around which shadow the new ones (or the distribution of  
> > > AUCTeX
> > > you are using is broken).
> >
> > Sorry, I'm a bit confused...
> >
> > The definition I  received (which was downloaded using fink, not sure
> > which mirror) used the expansion %x, which is not defined in tex-
> > expand-list.
> > So, it now works with %x removed.
> >
> > Are you suggesting that I put the %x back in and hence remove my
> > change? If so, can you tell me what %x is supposed to expand to?
> > Or am I correct to have it set up as it is now, without %x?
> >
> > Thanks again, and sorry for the confusion.
> >
> >   -- Peter
>
> I am just saying that the %x stuff is not present in vanilla  
> AUCTeX.  So
> either Fink or you put that in.  In the former case (assuming you did
> not change `TeX-command-list' and `TeX-expand-list') it could be a bug
> introduced by Fink.  In the latter case you should remove your
> customizations (assuming the %x stuff was introduced by you before the
> upgrade).
>
> --
> Ralf