Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F2816332C1 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 16:53:24 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 62529-06 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 19:53:13 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC5636340A0 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 16:53:13 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o33Jr8bn023457; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 15:53:09 -0400 (EDT) To: Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= cc: pgsql-docs , Peter Eisentraut Subject: Re: PDF build issue with 9.0 Alpha5 In-reply-to: <1270189232.5018.7.camel@hp-laptop2.gunduz.org> References: <1270189232.5018.7.camel@hp-laptop2.gunduz.org> Comments: In-reply-to Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= message dated "Fri, 02 Apr 2010 09:20:32 +0300" Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 15:53:08 -0400 Message-ID: <23456.1270324388@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.599 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201004/23 X-Sequence-Number: 5422 Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=DCND=DCZ?= writes: > I was trying to build PDF docs for 9.0 Alpha5, and I got this message: > ! TeX capacity exceeded, sorry [number of strings=245830]. I've found a possible solution for this. The bulk of the strings are being created by jadetex.dtx: it makes two control sequences for each flow object in the document. One of these is a page number and the other seems to have no purpose except to prevent creating duplicate hyperref anchors. However, diking out the latter doesn't create any obvious ill effects --- either we have no occurrences in our docs of a pattern that would result in a duplicate, or there isn't any real adverse consequence of having a dup. (And in any case it's hard to envision an adverse consequence that's worse than complete failure to build the document.) There turns out to be a very easy way to inject the code change, which is to create a file "jadetex.cfg" in the doc/src/sgml directory, containing the modified version of the relevant TeX macro. (Note: in the vpath case we'd probably need to link it into the build directory; I haven't experimented with that.) Put this in the file: \def\FlowObjectSetup#1{% \ifDoFOBSet \ifLabelElements \ifx\Label\@empty\let\Label\Element\fi \fi \ifx\Label\@empty\else \bgroup \ifNestedLink \else \hyper@anchorstart{\Label}\hyper@anchorend \PageLabel{\Label}% \fi \egroup \let\Label\@empty \let\Element\@empty \fi \fi } For comparison, the original definition we're replacing is \def\FlowObjectSetup#1{% \ifDoFOBSet \ifLabelElements \ifx\Label\@empty\let\Label\Element\fi \fi \ifx\Label\@empty\else \expandafter\ifx\csname x@\Label\endcsname\@madelink \else \bgroup \ifNestedLink \else \hyper@anchorstart{\Label}\hyper@anchorend \PageLabel{\Label}% \expandafter\gdef\csname x@\Label\endcsname{ }% \fi \egroup \let\Label\@empty \let\Element\@empty \fi \fi \fi } This should work with either jadetex 3.12 or 3.13, and probably older versions but I don't have source code handy to look at. 3.12 dates back to 2002 so it's probably old enough anyhow. I haven't tried to build anything except PDF output with this substituted code, so it's possible that it interferes with other output formats. Comments? regards, tom lane