Re: texi2dvi changes

[Karl Berry]

Hi Gavin,

    gs> If someone uses an "fl" index with the recorder, I expect either
    the index to be blank, or to be the recorder file interpreted as TeX
    source (a great ugly mess).

There's a comment in texi2dvi that says
  #  The default behaviour is `nomaybe'.
But the actual default for TEXI2DVI_USE_RECORDER is yesmaybe (line 1530).

Excuse my opinion, but this seems like the worst possible outcome.  This
way, an existing document that uses an fl index (as discussed, they
exist) will silently typeset garbage with a new texi2dvi.  Thus, with
the yesmaybe default, I strongly believe that texi2dvi should give a
definite error in the case of both the recorder being used and the fl
index being used.

Also, since the only workaround for this case would be to set
TEXI2DVI_USE_RECORDER, I am back to suggesting that it be in the help
message.  Or change the default to nomaybe, I guess, but as already
discussed, the recorder file seems more reliable in general.

Another approach, though suboptimal IMHO, would be for texinfo.tex and
makeinfo to reject up front an attempt to "@defindex fl".  That would be
better than "successfully" typesetting junk.  (I did my tests with the
texinfo.tex currently in the repo, FWIW.)


On another front: evidently some grep for openout is not being redirected.
(Looks like that's the case in check_openout_in_log_support.)
With attached, stdout from  texi2dvi indexfl.texi  starts with
\openout0 = `dum.dum'.

Best,
Karl

P.S. Triviality: I know you are English, but I think it's better to use
American spelling consistently, when the original is in Am.Eng., to avoid
unnecessary inconsistencies for future readers.  Just as I would use
"behaviour" with an original that was in UK.Eng.  Whatever ...

indexfl.texi
Description: Binary data