From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/58816 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Wolfgang Schuster Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: Two questions about a mysterious behavior of ConTeXt Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 15:09:40 +0200 Message-ID: <4BED4B94.2080801@googlemail.com> References: Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1273842597 32670 80.91.229.12 (14 May 2010 13:09:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 13:09:57 +0000 (UTC) To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Fri May 14 15:09:56 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([195.12.62.10]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OCueJ-0005HC-UQ for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 May 2010 15:09:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53D99C9B0D; Fri, 14 May 2010 15:09:55 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at balder.ntg.nl Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (balder.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id aWonDWGxQ+bG; Fri, 14 May 2010 15:09:51 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7E46C9AE6; Fri, 14 May 2010 15:09:51 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B96C9AE6 for ; Fri, 14 May 2010 15:09:49 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at balder.ntg.nl Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (balder.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id ZffyQoWKDBqb for ; Fri, 14 May 2010 15:09:44 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.152]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DCB6C9AE3 for ; Fri, 14 May 2010 15:09:43 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e12so204471fga.2 for ; Fri, 14 May 2010 06:09:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=u43MIAjTPDzCtcOeeLSC+uXlRb7gxCfxfbtlG//eIj0=; b=BVwFLPdSFCB6j5i2l336kFX21nLuxTz8If5wiwU1VJv0qwoGuTGLG9tZ65+jZvc9dc eko+4sjX3RN/+T8yVTFjmJS4FXSyeKD96XKytY2ZcPEYi+32fuzRrlvP8cZQaphIlNta 9JO8YY9kPP7qV2CGXw3H+T48ghCnOeEBa/aJA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=QtDYfxLVJmcCXPzqvrrIivU27Gc4dQSf4H0CTfF/salHqdMQGSqOvNeMuKxiZRmr02 l/qpr4MQ4pLquZxZsUOMfHaXKjVs+MSHH9xVzf8RVxFlDvo46rImiRVNtJS7pJlG0N4+ DBAGwwnzSinZtmIL8Ux829S2eLEPNZXO876e8= Original-Received: by 10.87.63.31 with SMTP id q31mr2823542fgk.18.1273842583740; Fri, 14 May 2010 06:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.2.23] (p5B2955F4.dip.t-dialin.net [91.41.85.244]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e11sm1219849fga.8.2010.05.14.06.09.42 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 14 May 2010 06:09:42 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; de; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:58816 Archived-At: Am 14.05.10 13:59, schrieb Marius: > Hello, > > I encountered two mysterious behaviours of ConTeXt mkvi and can't > resolve them by my self. So. > > The first one is: why does ConTeXt behaves differently then I use > environment ant then I don't. > There are two versions of the same code in the attached files. The > test.tex uses environment test-env and test2.tex does not. Then why > test.tex compiles while test2.tex does not? > > The second question is: why in the test-env.tex file ver2 of code > compiles while ver1 does not? > In a environment code is always treated is it would have been written in unprotected mode, i.e. your code is written as \unprotect \def\setupdissertation{...} ... \protect Wolfgang ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________