Open akerbos opened 8 years ago
Attack together with #58.
After refactoring of hashing business, the way is paved for this one.
Note to self: pimp HashManager.files_changed? to deal with without
and drop_from
parameters? Can that help with being smarter in the above sense?
Does the package logreq help here? As far as I understood, one can just prepend \RequirePackage{logreq}
before \documentclass
. Maybe this can be done somehow automatically. I remember that TeX4ht does something like that when translating.
Side comment: Your approach seems the one of rerunfilecheck, isn't it?
@koppor Thanks for these pointers!
logreq
does not seem in a position where you can rely on it providing all the information.
In general, relying on document and/or package authors to do something is contrary to my design goals here.rerunfilecheck
does indeed seem to do something similar. It is more targetted since it requires (package) authors to specify which files to check, but is therefore almost certainly incomplete.From my perspective, there is no general way to solve the "rerun problem" but from the outside, if there is one at all.
Maybe focussing on one (maintained) solution could make the result a) reusable across multiple tools and b) having a (larger) community maintaining the rules (refs https://github.com/ho-tex/rerunfilecheck/issues/1)... - Maybe I see too much help in the synergy for too little cases.
We can use hashes to do two things:
In daemon mode, carry over hashes between runs. If the hash after engine run nr 1 is the same as as before, no rerun is needed (except if extensions run).
Is this even possible between independent runs without
-c
?-n
, warn the user