From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 15 20:22:02 2022 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Nov 2022 01:22:02 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55610 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ov77q-0002OO-Cx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 20:22:02 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:54610) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ov77h-0002Ns-EL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 20:22:01 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ov77h-0004ho-9R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 20:21:53 -0500 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ov77e-0001U7-7C for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2022 20:21:53 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDB72240026 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 02:21:47 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1668561707; bh=DA/d8WXNorkwpLJfjwbuorD2L8229D3x8qMPWBrkQ8E=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=CnxOT1afVZYZ1cPnmCJnbNXvE425Kg8o+tI+Wn+TCY6q2879wGVD/6NXBzUVdaNqy SuM+20kgw8E+XS9VY1xlm5wxXBwU8U2coqxjklTD9fXl0nw+Fw0UnYl0qDbM7RcCTA nmuZ7AHCCd0cW3qOGGqbpsGn7prAd3qMst7AillqPGeULrYdW/rUkpfdUizTu0M5vn eChxk8rBcbvtsyC+xKPDT+l6wMb2BBWVHq5vKGBQdtYjSiHTRR/2s+bVYPKxbJRSJs 9vskPJb5FcTcIfqljvAGtyUkLjboT/gdHW/fOmD42a+pTzppeADFfN8oUJVgwN66Hq uNJUv8k+QyBAQ== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4NBld65V2mz6tmB for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 02:21:46 +0100 (CET) From: Ihor Radchenko To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: 28.1.90; Erroneous footnote link in Org info manual Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 01:22:28 +0000 Message-ID: <87edu3elrf.fsf@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Hi, I am forwarding this from Org mailing list discussion about Org manual. https://orgmode.org/list/87pmdqfao4.fsf@localhost In 16.5 Evaluating Code Blocks section of Org info manual, there is an example code block #+NAME: random #+BEGIN_SRC R :cache yes runif(1) #+END_SRC This code block is represented like the following in the texinfo Org manual source: @example #+NAME: random #+BEGIN_SRC R :cache yes runif(1) #+END_SRC ... @end example Note the (1). It is unexpectedly shown as a footnote reference and one can click on (1). This only happens in the info manual. Not in html. I have checked https://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/html_node/_0040example.html and I do not see anything wrong in the above texinfo source. I am also not an expert in texinfo. Could someone more experienced with texinfo check if the observed is something to be fixed on Org side, on Texinfo side, or maybe on Info-mode side? -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 16 07:42:53 2022 Received: (at 59293) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Nov 2022 12:42:53 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56298 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ovHkj-0007UR-HS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 07:42:53 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49492) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ovHkh-0007UF-7X for 59293@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 07:42:52 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ovHkb-00056M-Ae; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 07:42:45 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=C6r3yXNPqR6y30PaOJkDsnzfwlmKhGbkNsB32doZ1oY=; b=d6YzquKiGmYj IroSU50S4qR8ayVqo7zpvh1MQubR7qxg0UXK8mIXREDoiVyRrqvrYdtJTwAGt7QgBfJTYUrWhJDcb fkm2nRbfrBGrkYPxcHGTURd23adGJPn2aY3y8E1cIXLAjYHrK+rAwLnGnQsXN+l3H5gfSPFGFzxDV jMNYFSFBhpMyKeUdCIe6jvVwakdJ/C40bD4UK15Fcy5Av39lF0e2kQ6NA7iYUue3ELtFk+GSMWWr8 0oRBZxyJrY0Wzp2p77qw511DCEBhtZLMLSqIDU90PfVSfGnyCjLifM8IJnfFuFo1G2IYv28ZPEct5 buSsT0UGfV1GU8IqBKzgdg==; Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ovHka-00042j-9z; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 07:42:44 -0500 Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 14:42:42 +0200 Message-Id: <83o7t7gjel.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Ihor Radchenko In-Reply-To: <87edu3elrf.fsf@localhost> (message from Ihor Radchenko on Wed, 16 Nov 2022 01:22:28 +0000) Subject: Re: bug#59293: 28.1.90; Erroneous footnote link in Org info manual References: <87edu3elrf.fsf@localhost> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 59293 Cc: 59293@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Ihor Radchenko > Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 01:22:28 +0000 > > In 16.5 Evaluating Code Blocks section of Org info manual, there is an > example code block > > #+NAME: random > #+BEGIN_SRC R :cache yes > runif(1) > #+END_SRC > > This code block is represented like the following in the texinfo Org > manual source: > > @example > #+NAME: random > #+BEGIN_SRC R :cache yes > runif(1) > #+END_SRC > > ... > @end example > > Note the (1). It is unexpectedly shown as a footnote reference and one > can click on (1). This only happens in the info manual. Not in html. > > I have checked > https://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/html_node/_0040example.html > > and I do not see anything wrong in the above texinfo source. > > I am also not an expert in texinfo. > > Could someone more experienced with texinfo check if the observed is > something to be fixed on Org side, on Texinfo side, or maybe on > Info-mode side? It's a bug in info.el: it fontifies the footnote references, but the detection of footnote cannot distinguish between "(1)" that is a reference to a footnote and "(1)" that just stands for itself. My suggestion is to modify the example in the manual to avoid the false match, for example use "runif(3)" if possible. Alternatively, remove the real footnotes and make them notes in parentheses. Or just live with the problem... From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Nov 17 00:44:54 2022 Received: (at 59293) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Nov 2022 05:44:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58805 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ovXhl-0002Qy-HU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 00:44:54 -0500 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:56653) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ovXhf-0002Qf-R1 for 59293@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 00:44:51 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5FC0240026 for <59293@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 06:44:39 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1668663881; bh=PvX/hm55kOxAToDtexdghHVs/GSItocQ9ccHQw5pen0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=a+0dovvDGQvsufyu0MKacDZKwS7JMzSM5ILAE+95K9kwDGm9ZT/JOK/gtic/KuXYW I7F34ZCns3m1AzQxXhFLnGx50ze6SW7plt5hQwPn99nglVAgsNiAqCL9QV+LzqW3v4 5QGo0zPdh+dnbAPs1TP1ai/hz/9y9Icj2GFKPL71ha8sNeR8YLJsS/JQf+eGqwHs5C KejvS8hvg35P35gFhZP24TBswupiwSlasf7P+rJXjOI8boMm4aYTpD9PM7H8rUwg84 hI6kCbXefMIspHnHfd/G5G6BsqfC2ElPH6KXZssa6CX7b4Egzn1r8JdbkcBiCRNiJg N7VaKrSjwd6kg== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4NCTPx5sgpz9rxH; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 06:44:34 +0100 (CET) From: Ihor Radchenko To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#59293: 28.1.90; Erroneous footnote link in Org info manual In-Reply-To: <83o7t7gjel.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87edu3elrf.fsf@localhost> <83o7t7gjel.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 05:45:16 +0000 Message-ID: <87wn7ub0cz.fsf@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 59293 Cc: 59293@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Could someone more experienced with texinfo check if the observed is >> something to be fixed on Org side, on Texinfo side, or maybe on >> Info-mode side? > > It's a bug in info.el: it fontifies the footnote references, but the > detection of footnote cannot distinguish between "(1)" that is a > reference to a footnote and "(1)" that just stands for itself. Thanks for clarification. Is it something known but difficult to fix? > My suggestion is to modify the example in the manual to avoid the > false match, for example use "runif(3)" if possible. Alternatively, > remove the real footnotes and make them notes in parentheses. Or > just live with the problem... I went with runif(+1). https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git/commit/?id=79c64d8c3ac66e13a333a4cbc8ba15e242bc01fb -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Nov 17 02:11:49 2022 Received: (at 59293-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Nov 2022 07:11:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58930 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ovZ3t-00078I-0a for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 02:11:49 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:34576) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ovZ3q-000784-A9 for 59293-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 02:11:48 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ovZ3k-00023M-CK; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 02:11:41 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=rBVLKele7NX7yvpd3KZg2hXtD8Sv/fx94PJjHx+UJ64=; b=TquawYZrjKTo Ngs1xyFGEgEKdU2aOLG7VP3TfT5Wq8hJvC+pTpYz6K9f938As0ARa/HSGz7cTUtig2yFqOs1aehz3 G7QDvEMdlj35qKE5KBO8pUozPzEVwgLzed/rjcnBpfxm0rOotHRcRj6Da1Eltidt9D3WtXRBMIXD0 Go0F0FXwl+cCd6OLGiegWe7Rk/prZpxGd4T8B0pmgjvcMVX32J+QPiqGhEGC/gB6PQLe4NQiwpZSD ED/1Yr+qzSbVCLWOVm/8oG15tMJ3ENrgEkRspk24u43GGFsn/FGepiWI6eLVlIVyuZrPK00J4flhY 3CHfExm2Xkn/NR1e/bVTNA==; Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ovZ3j-0000sR-Rz; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 02:11:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:11:40 +0200 Message-Id: <83o7t6dphv.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Ihor Radchenko In-Reply-To: <87wn7ub0cz.fsf@localhost> (message from Ihor Radchenko on Thu, 17 Nov 2022 05:45:16 +0000) Subject: Re: bug#59293: 28.1.90; Erroneous footnote link in Org info manual References: <87edu3elrf.fsf@localhost> <83o7t7gjel.fsf@gnu.org> <87wn7ub0cz.fsf@localhost> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 59293-done Cc: 59293-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Ihor Radchenko > Cc: 59293@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 05:45:16 +0000 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > It's a bug in info.el: it fontifies the footnote references, but the > > detection of footnote cannot distinguish between "(1)" that is a > > reference to a footnote and "(1)" that just stands for itself. > > Thanks for clarification. Is it something known but difficult to fix? AFAIU the code, it detects footnote references by looking for [0-9]+ in parentheses, then fontifies those of the references whose numbers are smaller than the number of footnotes actually present in the node. So, for example, if a node has 5 footnotes, "(6)" will not be fontified, but each occurrence of "(4)" will be fontified. The comment there says: ;; Don't fontify parenthesized numbers that cannot ;; possibly be one of this node's footnotes. This still ;; doesn't catch unrelated numbers that happen to be ;; small enough, but in that case they should use ;; "@footnotestyle separate" in the Texinfo sources. > > My suggestion is to modify the example in the manual to avoid the > > false match, for example use "runif(3)" if possible. Alternatively, > > remove the real footnotes and make them notes in parentheses. Or > > just live with the problem... > > I went with runif(+1). > https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git/commit/?id=79c64d8c3ac66e13a333a4cbc8ba15e242bc01fb That's a good solution, thanks. So I'm closing this bug report. From unknown Mon Aug 11 19:03:25 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 12:24:16 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator