asciidoc 8

Wink Saville· Feb 18, 2008, 00:23 UTC · lore

I ran into the asciidoc 8 issue where some of the docs don't get generated properly on my system with asciidoc 8.2.1.

Should I just downgrade? What would be the "best" version to use.

Wink Saville

Wincent Colaiuta· Feb 18, 2008, 07:43 UTC · re: Wink Saville · lore

Re: asciidoc 8

El 18/2/2008, a las 1:23, Wink Saville escribió:

Show 5 quoted lines

> I ran into the asciidoc 8 issue where some of the docs don't
> get generated properly on my system with asciidoc 8.2.1.
>
> Should I just downgrade? What would be the "best" version
> to use.

I ran into problems with 8 a while ago, poked around for a while, couldn't find the cause of the problem, and so downgraded to the 7 series (don't recall the exact version, but it was the last release in the 7 series). I figured this was just the simplest thing to do seeing as the official manual page archives are generated with 7, as far as I know.

I know that later a fix for the breakage that I was seeing was checked in (see 5162e69), so in theory 8 should be fine now (at least, the latest version of it, but I see you're using an older version which probably isn't affected by the link problem). What problem are you seeing? What version of Git are you using?

Cheers, Wincent

Wink Saville· Feb 18, 2008, 17:37 UTC · re: Wincent Colaiuta · lore

Re: asciidoc 8

Wincent Colaiuta wrote:

Show 26 quoted lines

> El 18/2/2008, a las 1:23, Wink Saville escribió:
>
>> I ran into the asciidoc 8 issue where some of the docs don't
>> get generated properly on my system with asciidoc 8.2.1.
>>
>> Should I just downgrade? What would be the "best" version
>> to use.
>
> I ran into problems with 8 a while ago, poked around for a while, 
> couldn't find the cause of the problem, and so downgraded to the 7 
> series (don't recall the exact version, but it was the last release in 
> the 7 series). I figured this was just the simplest thing to do seeing 
> as the official manual page archives are generated with 7, as far as I 
> know.
>
> I know that later a fix for the breakage that I was seeing was checked 
> in (see 5162e69), so in theory 8 should be fine now (at least, the 
> latest version of it, but I see you're using an older version which 
> probably isn't affected by the link problem). What problem are you 
> seeing? What version of Git are you using?
>
> Cheers,
> Wincent
>
>
>

I'm seeing the missing "+" problem which, after reading INSTALL, was fixed by adding ASCIIDOC8=YesPlease to my command line. But after doing that I was still seeing .ft C like this:

           .ft C
                   URL: one of the above URL format
                   Push: <refspec>
                   Pull: <refspec>

.ft

where "<pre>" blocks in the html documentation show up. I was first seeing the problems with git 1.5.4 and then yesterday built 1.5.4.2 and still have the above problem.

Wink Saville