Change to output routine code breaks latex afterpage package
Frank Mittelbach
frank.mittelbach at latex-project.org
Mon Mar 25 09:18:20 CET 2024
Am 24.03.24 um 23:44 schrieb Karl Berry:
> an \aftergroup in the output routine is simply lost
>
> DRF quickly came up with a fix (below). Committed in r70752. I'll also
> attach my -ini test file, for the record (also committed to the repo).
so he did
>
> In hopes that this is sufficient, I've set up a branch for rebuilding
> the binaries and will write tlbuild next.
>
> If anyone else can look at the change / confirm the fix, all to the
> good, of course ... --thanks, karl.
what I deduce from just the last patch I would guess so. He misused :-)
output_active to trigger error and drop extra tokens and therefore moved
end_token_list; {conserve stack space in case more outputs are triggered}
earlier, but that then also dropped the aftergroup tokens in all cases.
so yes, using its own boolean looks much safer.
Incidentally, your test file that you appended is a bit odd because it
does \aftergroup on "s" and then typeset "hould-appear" in the output
routine so that it would generate "hould-appears"
Not exactly wrong but perhaps surprising to somebody down the road.
Perhaps better
\def\xxx{\aftergroup\yyy}
\def\yyy{\message{message should show up}}
by the way how do you test such -ini tests automatically?
cheers
frank
More information about the tex-live
mailing list.