From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@gunduz.org>
To: Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>
To: pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Problem building 9.0 Beta 3 US PDF file
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 23:19:11 -0400
Message-ID: <6491.1278731951@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19765.1278687443@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <1278672450.2286.30.camel@hp-laptop2.gunduz.org>
<19765.1278687443@sss.pgh.pa.us>
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
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, devrim@gunduz.org, laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at
Subject: Re: Problem building 9.0 Beta 3 US PDF file
In-Reply-To: <6491.1278731951@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox