Change to output routine code breaks latex afterpage package

Frank Mittelbach frank.mittelbach at
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\yyy{\message{message should show up}}

by the way how do you test such -ini tests automatically?


More information about the tex-live mailing list.