Package Natbib Error (only new versions suffer from this)

[titoo...@gmail.com]

I want to alert people of an error with newer versions of natbib and
certain common bibliography styles.

I encountered the problem, posted the issue here
http://www.latex-community.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=4034, and
got it resolved by manually overwriting the new version of natbib.sty
with an older one, which is not optimal..

So authors to the natbib.sty or ieeetr.bst should be aware of this.

Regards

[Dan Luecking]

ieeetr.bst is dated 29 Jan 1988. This is infinitely
old in computer years. I'm certain it predates natbib.

I also looked into the resulting .bbl file and there
appears to be no way natbib can discern what information
is author and what is the year.

There have been several different versions of various ieee
bibtex styles over the years. Is it possible your laptop has one
that is natbib compatible? The one I have was written by
Oren Patashnik (the author of bibtex) and is clearly not
written for natbib.

In your postings to latex-community.org you say "it works
perfectly on the old laptop". Do you mean that you really
did get author-year citations? Or do you just mean you got
no error messages and numerical citations?
If you want numerical citations:
\usepackage[numbers]{natbib}

There is an IEEEtran package that includes (in addition to
a class file IEEEtran.cls) several IEEEtran*.bst files,
dated 30 Sep 2008. Of those .bst files, two claim
compatibility with natbib, but warn that the result is "Not
for normal IEEE work". I assume that means, IEEE Transactions
does not normally use author-year citation style.

Dan
To reply by email, change LookInSig to luecking

[titoo...@gmail.com]

On 20 Feb., 19:05, Dan Luecking <LookIn...@uark.edu> wrote:

Hell again,

"Or do you just mean you got
no error messages and numerical citations?"

Yes, this is what I get (and want.. hehe). As stated in the thread it
works now, i just copied the natbib.styfrommy old pc to my new (thus
overwriting the newest version of natbib.sty)

Of course, I am aware that this solution is not optimal, therefore I
wanted to let ppl know. But I also want to make clear that I am no
MikTeX/LaTeX / BibTeX expert, and onlyknow how to use it on a beginner
to intermediate level, which is sufficient for my purposes. Hence, I
might have done something that is not ment to be done. Although, I
have used the same style for making my reports and papers for 5 years
now.

So just to be clear:
I setup my .tex documents using natbib package, refer to an
external .bib file with all my references, use ieeetr.bst as style -
and within text I use \cite{refkey}:

\usepackage[square,sort]{natbib}

\cite{blabla}

\newpage
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{References}
\small\bibliography{masterRefs}\label{Litt}
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}

[Dan Luecking]

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:02:43 -0800 (PST), titoo...@gmail.com wrote:

>On 20 Feb., 19:05, Dan Luecking <LookIn...@uark.edu> wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:28:01 -0800 (PST), titoo.j...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >I want to alert people of an error with newer versions of natbib and
>> >certain common bibliography styles.
>>
>> >I encountered the problem, posted the issue here
>> >http://www.latex-community.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=4034, and
>> >got it resolved by manually overwriting the new version of natbib.sty
>> >with an older one, which is not optimal..

[...]

>>
>> In your postings to latex-community.org you say "it works
>> perfectly on the old laptop". Do you mean that you really
>> did get author-year citations? Or do you just mean you got
>> no error messages and numerical citations?
>> If you want numerical citations:
>>   \usepackage[numbers]{natbib}
>>
>> There is an IEEEtran package that includes (in addition to
>> a class file IEEEtran.cls) several IEEEtran*.bst files,  
>> dated 30 Sep 2008. Of those .bst files, two claim
>> compatibility with natbib, but warn that the result is "Not
>> for normal IEEE work". I assume that means, IEEE Transactions
>> does not normally use author-year citation style.

[...]

>
>Hell again,
>
>"Or do you just mean you got
> no error messages and numerical citations?"
>
>Yes, this is what I get (and want.. hehe). As stated in the thread it
>works now, i just copied the natbib.styfrommy old pc to my new (thus
>overwriting the newest version of natbib.sty)
>
>Of course, I am aware that this solution is not optimal, therefore I
>wanted to let ppl know. But I also want to make clear that I am no
>MikTeX/LaTeX / BibTeX expert, and onlyknow how to use it on a beginner
>to intermediate level, which is sufficient for my purposes. Hence, I
>might have done something that is not ment to be done. Although, I
>have used the same style for making my reports and papers for 5 years
>now.
>
>So just to be clear:
>I setup my .tex documents using natbib package, refer to an
>external .bib file with all my references, use ieeetr.bst as style -
>and within text I use \cite{refkey}:
>
>\usepackage[square,sort]{natbib}

Also to be clear: my suggestion was to try adding the
"numbers" option (to the newest version of natbib):
\usepackage[numbers,square,sort]{natbib}
That worked for me on a simple doc.

Another thing that worked was using IEEEtranN.bst instead
of ieeetr.bst (to get author-year citations). I can't say
if its formating of the references is what you want. The
only differences in my tests was the location of the words
"second ed." -- after the publisher(?) instead of the title.

[titoo...@gmail.com]

On 23 Feb., 17:40, Dan Luecking <LookIn...@uark.edu> wrote:

\usepackage[square,sort]{natbib} did the trick with the new version of
natbib.sty

Thank you