warning with the footmisc package
Dasch
I've got a warning when I use the footmisc package. How can I get rid of
it ?
Here is the command I use:
\usepackage[bottom]{footmisc}
And here is the output given by LaTeX:
Package: footmisc 2004/01/23 v5.3a a miscellany of footnote facilities
\FN@temptoken=\toks14
\footnotemargin=\dimen105
LaTeX Warning: Command \@makecol has changed.
Check if current package is valid.
I use MikTeX (I did all the updates, so I guess I have the last version)
under WinXP
Thanks in advance,
Dasch
Ulrike Fischer
Didn't you read and understand the answers that you got in
fr.comp.text.tex to the same question? I thought they told you that
such questions needs a minimal example and that your problem has
something to do with the versions of your files, so you should also
sent the output of the \listfile-command. I really don't want to have
to start all over again.
--
Ulrike Fischer
e-mail: zusätzlich meinen Vornamen vor dem @ einfügen.
e-mail: add my first name between the news and the @.
Robin Fairbairns
>Dasch <no...@spam.com> schrieb:
>> I've got a warning when I use the footmisc package. How can I get rid of
>> it ?
>>
>> Here is the command I use:
>> \usepackage[bottom]{footmisc}
>>
>> And here is the output given by LaTeX:
>>
>> Package: footmisc 2004/01/23 v5.3a a miscellany of footnote facilities
>> \FN@temptoken=\toks14
>> \footnotemargin=\dimen105
>>
>>
>> LaTeX Warning: Command \@makecol has changed.
>> Check if current package is valid.
>>
>>
>> I use MikTeX (I did all the updates, so I guess I have the last version)
>> under WinXP
>
>Didn't you read and understand the answers that you got in
>fr.comp.text.tex to the same question? I thought they told you that
>such questions needs a minimal example and that your problem has
>something to do with the versions of your files, so you should also
>sent the output of the \listfile-command. I really don't want to have
>to start all over again.
sigh. i admit i've not tried footmisc 2004/01/23 with latex
2003/12/01, which was issued later than the footmisc release :-(
i'll take a look at the problem over the weekend -- can't do it just
now.
ulrike, for once, this one is a problem that _doesn't_ require full
details ... sorry to barge in this way. (and plainly i ought to be
reading fr.c.t.t -- i can, after all -- but life is a finite resource
and i already squander too much of it in hospitals and things...)
--
Robin (http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq) Fairbairns, Cambridge
Ulrike Fischer
> ulrike, for once, this one is a problem that _doesn't_ require full
> details ... sorry to barge in this way. (and plainly i ought to be
> reading fr.c.t.t -- i can, after all -- but life is a finite resource
> and i already squander too much of it in hospitals and things...)
>
I didn't mind that he didn't sent all the details, but that he ignored
every answer he got in fr.c.t.t. He asked there exactly the same
question (in french). I sent him a minimal document and told him I
can't reproduce the problem. Someone else also asked for a minimal
document. Dasch said sorry and send one. Then two people answered, one
who couldn't reproduce the error and the other one (with a new LaTeX)
who could and who told him it's a problem of the new LaTeX.
He got a lot of useful informations and then he goes to c.t.t. and sent
a question that makes the impression he hasn't a clue what's going on.
He could have sent you a bug report or post here the simple remark
"there is a clash between footmisc version ... and the new LaTeX .... I
get the error ...".
Robin Fairbairns
>r...@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns) schrieb:
>> ulrike, for once, this one is a problem that _doesn't_ require full
>> details ... sorry to barge in this way. (and plainly i ought to be
>> reading fr.c.t.t -- i can, after all -- but life is a finite resource
>> and i already squander too much of it in hospitals and things...)
>
>I didn't mind that he didn't sent all the details, but that he ignored
>every answer he got in fr.c.t.t. He asked there exactly the same
>question (in french). I sent him a minimal document and told him I
>can't reproduce the problem. Someone else also asked for a minimal
>document. Dasch said sorry and send one. Then two people answered, one
>who couldn't reproduce the error and the other one (with a new LaTeX)
>who could and who told him it's a problem of the new LaTeX.
>
>He got a lot of useful informations and then he goes to c.t.t. and sent
>a question that makes the impression he hasn't a clue what's going on.
>
>He could have sent you a bug report or post here the simple remark
>"there is a clash between footmisc version ... and the new LaTeX .... I
>get the error ...".
i get it. he could indeed have saved me time by sending an actual
failing example. but the poor dear probably imagines i have a crystal
ball that would unfailingly find the combination of options that
provoke the error.
however, i did find the necessary combination, eventually, after
installing the latest latex on my home machine.
so i can get down to it now. and while i'm at it, i can make a start
at thinking of a per-spread footnote setup for william adams.