How to build a Makefile that builds a LaTeX document with dependencies in one runMakefile for a latex...

What can I do if someone tampers with my SSH public key?

An Undercover Army

Finding integer solution to a quadratic equation in two unknowns

Is there a math expression equivalent to the conditional ternary operator?

After Brexit, will the EU recognize British passports that are valid for more than ten years?

Why aren't there more Gauls like Obelix?

Can I challenge the interviewer to give me a proper technical feedback?

Is this a crown race?

How to add theme from github with composer

EXM headers adding bounce@spe.sitecoremail.com as the sender

How do you make a gun that shoots melee weapons and/or swords?

Can I frame a new window without adding jack studs?

Sort Array By Month & Year | JavaScript

Short story about an infectious indestructible metal bar?

School performs periodic password audits. Is my password compromised?

Should I apply for my boss's promotion?

What does *dead* mean in *What do you mean, dead?*?

What is the best index strategy or query SELECT when performing a search/lookup BETWEEN IP address (IPv4 and IPv6) ranges?

Help! My Character is too much for her story!

Can inspiration allow the Rogue to make a Sneak Attack?

Is it a Cyclops number? "Nobody" knows!

How to write a chaotic neutral protagonist and prevent my readers from thinking they are evil?

What is the purpose of a disclaimer like "this is not legal advice"?

Why restrict private health insurance?



How to build a Makefile that builds a LaTeX document with dependencies in one run


Makefile for a latex reportUse MiKTeX option through latexmklatexmk: Multiple custom-generated files and inputMakefile that prevents tex directory from being cluttered with build outputHow to provide a Makefile to Texlipse?Latexmk - Non-existent destination filesLatexMK incorrectly tries to build files used by mintedDetermine within LaTeX how many times latexmk have runWhich build system should I prefer if I want to distribute tex files?Get latexmk's warning summary without rerunning pdflatex (more than once)?Cleaning intermediate files from custom latexmk dependencies without deleting the final PDF













4















I am trying to create a Makefile for my paper where I can type just make and it will compile everything in one go. The paper has several figures which are generated from scripts. However, everything I've tried requires several runs of make to get both the scripts to run and the paper itself.



I started with something based on this answer



all: paper.pdf

paper.pdf:

%.pdf: %.tex
$(LATEXMK) -lualatex -halt-on-error -pdf -M -MP -MF $*.d $*

some-plot.pgf:
script_to_generate_plot.py

-include *.d


However, from a clean build, or whenever I add a plot, this requires running make twice, once to generate the .d file and once to actually build the paper. And annoyingly the first time you just have to bypass an annoying "file not found" prompt.



I then noticed that latexmk has a flag to use make to build missing files, so I'm trying that:



all: paper.pdf

paper.pdf:

%.pdf: %.tex
$(LATEXMK) -lualatex -interaction=nonstopmode -pdf -dvi- -ps- -use-make $*

some-plot.pgf:
python script_to_generate_plot.py


Now what this does is finds one plot missing, build it, then fails with



Latexmk: 'pdflatex': source file 'some-plot.pgf' doesn't exist. I'll try making it...
------------
Running 'make "some-plot.pgf"'
------------
python script_to_generate_plot.py
Latexmk: Summary of warnings:
Latex failed to resolve 1 reference(s)
Latexmk: Errors, so I did not complete making targets
Collected error summary (may duplicate other messages):
pdflatex: Command for 'pdflatex' gave return code 256
Latexmk: Use the -f option to force complete processing,
unless error was exceeding maximum runs of latex/pdflatex.
make: *** [paper.pdf] Error 12


If I run make again that plot was built, but it does the same thing with another one.



If I keep running make it eventually builds all my plots one by one (I have several plots, some of which take a while to generate so I'd like to keep the scripts to generate them separate).



How can I make it so that it builds everything in one go, regardless of which and how many files need to be regenerated?



EDIT I guess I forgot to mention that my other goal here is to avoid manually stating every .tex/.pgf/.pdf file dependency in my Makefile. If I do that, there's no point to using latexmk. I've done the manual Makefile before, but I'm always forgetting to update the dependency graph whenever I add a new file or rearrange things. My understanding is that the strength of latexmk is that it can figure that stuff out automatically. If I can get something that does that, that would be ideal. That and latexmk automatically rebuilds the paper and bib files as many times as necessary.



EDIT 2
I tried using the suggestion from the output, to use the -f flag to latexmk. This builds about 5 or so plots, then errors with



Rule 'pdflatex': File changes, etc:
Changed files, or newly in use since previous run(s):
'origen-meeseeks.pgf'
Latexmk: Maximum runs of pdflatex reached without getting stable files
Failure to make 'paper.pdf'
Latexmk: Errors, in force_mode: so I tried finishing targets
Collected error summary (may duplicate other messages):
pdflatex: Command for 'pdflatex' gave return code 256
Latexmk: Did not finish processing file 'paper':
'pdflatex' needed too many passes
make: *** [paper.pdf] Error 12
transmutagen-papermaster*=$latexmk -


So it almost does what I want. How do I increase the max number of passes?










share|improve this question

























  • I don't know about latexmk. However, for make, you need to tell it that the final PDF requires the plot's PDF. Then it will know not to apply the rule to make the final PDF until it has made the plot's PDF. (Or the plot's PGF or whatever it needs.) Then you just need a rule to make the plot's PDF. That's how make works: you tell it what ingredients each target needs and provide a recipe for turning the ingredients into the target. One target can have another target as an ingredient and make will figure out what to do in what order.

    – cfr
    Nov 16 '17 at 2:39






  • 1





    So %.pdf: %.tex shouldn't tell make that only one ingredient is needed for all PDFs because that's a lie! One of the PDFs needs another ingredient, so you need to list that ingredient, too.

    – cfr
    Nov 16 '17 at 2:41











  • I'm also by no means an expert on latexmk, but isn't it odd to use latexmk inside a make file, especially when latexmk is (additionally) told to (try to) 'use make?

    – jon
    Nov 16 '17 at 3:10













  • It is weird. My idea was that make would call latexmk (without me having to type all the arguments each time like -lualatex), then latexmk would call make to build the dependencies. So it shouldn't actually require the dependencies in the Makefile, because it's a separate make process that builds the plots.

    – asmeurer
    Nov 16 '17 at 21:15











  • In the way of using latexmk given in the first Makefile, the options given to latexmk tell it to generate dependency information in a form that is read by make when it executes the -include line. That's been removed from the second version, which shows an incorrect way of calling latexmk from a Makefile. The first Makefile is a good way of combining the use of latexmk and make.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:02
















4















I am trying to create a Makefile for my paper where I can type just make and it will compile everything in one go. The paper has several figures which are generated from scripts. However, everything I've tried requires several runs of make to get both the scripts to run and the paper itself.



I started with something based on this answer



all: paper.pdf

paper.pdf:

%.pdf: %.tex
$(LATEXMK) -lualatex -halt-on-error -pdf -M -MP -MF $*.d $*

some-plot.pgf:
script_to_generate_plot.py

-include *.d


However, from a clean build, or whenever I add a plot, this requires running make twice, once to generate the .d file and once to actually build the paper. And annoyingly the first time you just have to bypass an annoying "file not found" prompt.



I then noticed that latexmk has a flag to use make to build missing files, so I'm trying that:



all: paper.pdf

paper.pdf:

%.pdf: %.tex
$(LATEXMK) -lualatex -interaction=nonstopmode -pdf -dvi- -ps- -use-make $*

some-plot.pgf:
python script_to_generate_plot.py


Now what this does is finds one plot missing, build it, then fails with



Latexmk: 'pdflatex': source file 'some-plot.pgf' doesn't exist. I'll try making it...
------------
Running 'make "some-plot.pgf"'
------------
python script_to_generate_plot.py
Latexmk: Summary of warnings:
Latex failed to resolve 1 reference(s)
Latexmk: Errors, so I did not complete making targets
Collected error summary (may duplicate other messages):
pdflatex: Command for 'pdflatex' gave return code 256
Latexmk: Use the -f option to force complete processing,
unless error was exceeding maximum runs of latex/pdflatex.
make: *** [paper.pdf] Error 12


If I run make again that plot was built, but it does the same thing with another one.



If I keep running make it eventually builds all my plots one by one (I have several plots, some of which take a while to generate so I'd like to keep the scripts to generate them separate).



How can I make it so that it builds everything in one go, regardless of which and how many files need to be regenerated?



EDIT I guess I forgot to mention that my other goal here is to avoid manually stating every .tex/.pgf/.pdf file dependency in my Makefile. If I do that, there's no point to using latexmk. I've done the manual Makefile before, but I'm always forgetting to update the dependency graph whenever I add a new file or rearrange things. My understanding is that the strength of latexmk is that it can figure that stuff out automatically. If I can get something that does that, that would be ideal. That and latexmk automatically rebuilds the paper and bib files as many times as necessary.



EDIT 2
I tried using the suggestion from the output, to use the -f flag to latexmk. This builds about 5 or so plots, then errors with



Rule 'pdflatex': File changes, etc:
Changed files, or newly in use since previous run(s):
'origen-meeseeks.pgf'
Latexmk: Maximum runs of pdflatex reached without getting stable files
Failure to make 'paper.pdf'
Latexmk: Errors, in force_mode: so I tried finishing targets
Collected error summary (may duplicate other messages):
pdflatex: Command for 'pdflatex' gave return code 256
Latexmk: Did not finish processing file 'paper':
'pdflatex' needed too many passes
make: *** [paper.pdf] Error 12
transmutagen-papermaster*=$latexmk -


So it almost does what I want. How do I increase the max number of passes?










share|improve this question

























  • I don't know about latexmk. However, for make, you need to tell it that the final PDF requires the plot's PDF. Then it will know not to apply the rule to make the final PDF until it has made the plot's PDF. (Or the plot's PGF or whatever it needs.) Then you just need a rule to make the plot's PDF. That's how make works: you tell it what ingredients each target needs and provide a recipe for turning the ingredients into the target. One target can have another target as an ingredient and make will figure out what to do in what order.

    – cfr
    Nov 16 '17 at 2:39






  • 1





    So %.pdf: %.tex shouldn't tell make that only one ingredient is needed for all PDFs because that's a lie! One of the PDFs needs another ingredient, so you need to list that ingredient, too.

    – cfr
    Nov 16 '17 at 2:41











  • I'm also by no means an expert on latexmk, but isn't it odd to use latexmk inside a make file, especially when latexmk is (additionally) told to (try to) 'use make?

    – jon
    Nov 16 '17 at 3:10













  • It is weird. My idea was that make would call latexmk (without me having to type all the arguments each time like -lualatex), then latexmk would call make to build the dependencies. So it shouldn't actually require the dependencies in the Makefile, because it's a separate make process that builds the plots.

    – asmeurer
    Nov 16 '17 at 21:15











  • In the way of using latexmk given in the first Makefile, the options given to latexmk tell it to generate dependency information in a form that is read by make when it executes the -include line. That's been removed from the second version, which shows an incorrect way of calling latexmk from a Makefile. The first Makefile is a good way of combining the use of latexmk and make.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:02














4












4








4








I am trying to create a Makefile for my paper where I can type just make and it will compile everything in one go. The paper has several figures which are generated from scripts. However, everything I've tried requires several runs of make to get both the scripts to run and the paper itself.



I started with something based on this answer



all: paper.pdf

paper.pdf:

%.pdf: %.tex
$(LATEXMK) -lualatex -halt-on-error -pdf -M -MP -MF $*.d $*

some-plot.pgf:
script_to_generate_plot.py

-include *.d


However, from a clean build, or whenever I add a plot, this requires running make twice, once to generate the .d file and once to actually build the paper. And annoyingly the first time you just have to bypass an annoying "file not found" prompt.



I then noticed that latexmk has a flag to use make to build missing files, so I'm trying that:



all: paper.pdf

paper.pdf:

%.pdf: %.tex
$(LATEXMK) -lualatex -interaction=nonstopmode -pdf -dvi- -ps- -use-make $*

some-plot.pgf:
python script_to_generate_plot.py


Now what this does is finds one plot missing, build it, then fails with



Latexmk: 'pdflatex': source file 'some-plot.pgf' doesn't exist. I'll try making it...
------------
Running 'make "some-plot.pgf"'
------------
python script_to_generate_plot.py
Latexmk: Summary of warnings:
Latex failed to resolve 1 reference(s)
Latexmk: Errors, so I did not complete making targets
Collected error summary (may duplicate other messages):
pdflatex: Command for 'pdflatex' gave return code 256
Latexmk: Use the -f option to force complete processing,
unless error was exceeding maximum runs of latex/pdflatex.
make: *** [paper.pdf] Error 12


If I run make again that plot was built, but it does the same thing with another one.



If I keep running make it eventually builds all my plots one by one (I have several plots, some of which take a while to generate so I'd like to keep the scripts to generate them separate).



How can I make it so that it builds everything in one go, regardless of which and how many files need to be regenerated?



EDIT I guess I forgot to mention that my other goal here is to avoid manually stating every .tex/.pgf/.pdf file dependency in my Makefile. If I do that, there's no point to using latexmk. I've done the manual Makefile before, but I'm always forgetting to update the dependency graph whenever I add a new file or rearrange things. My understanding is that the strength of latexmk is that it can figure that stuff out automatically. If I can get something that does that, that would be ideal. That and latexmk automatically rebuilds the paper and bib files as many times as necessary.



EDIT 2
I tried using the suggestion from the output, to use the -f flag to latexmk. This builds about 5 or so plots, then errors with



Rule 'pdflatex': File changes, etc:
Changed files, or newly in use since previous run(s):
'origen-meeseeks.pgf'
Latexmk: Maximum runs of pdflatex reached without getting stable files
Failure to make 'paper.pdf'
Latexmk: Errors, in force_mode: so I tried finishing targets
Collected error summary (may duplicate other messages):
pdflatex: Command for 'pdflatex' gave return code 256
Latexmk: Did not finish processing file 'paper':
'pdflatex' needed too many passes
make: *** [paper.pdf] Error 12
transmutagen-papermaster*=$latexmk -


So it almost does what I want. How do I increase the max number of passes?










share|improve this question
















I am trying to create a Makefile for my paper where I can type just make and it will compile everything in one go. The paper has several figures which are generated from scripts. However, everything I've tried requires several runs of make to get both the scripts to run and the paper itself.



I started with something based on this answer



all: paper.pdf

paper.pdf:

%.pdf: %.tex
$(LATEXMK) -lualatex -halt-on-error -pdf -M -MP -MF $*.d $*

some-plot.pgf:
script_to_generate_plot.py

-include *.d


However, from a clean build, or whenever I add a plot, this requires running make twice, once to generate the .d file and once to actually build the paper. And annoyingly the first time you just have to bypass an annoying "file not found" prompt.



I then noticed that latexmk has a flag to use make to build missing files, so I'm trying that:



all: paper.pdf

paper.pdf:

%.pdf: %.tex
$(LATEXMK) -lualatex -interaction=nonstopmode -pdf -dvi- -ps- -use-make $*

some-plot.pgf:
python script_to_generate_plot.py


Now what this does is finds one plot missing, build it, then fails with



Latexmk: 'pdflatex': source file 'some-plot.pgf' doesn't exist. I'll try making it...
------------
Running 'make "some-plot.pgf"'
------------
python script_to_generate_plot.py
Latexmk: Summary of warnings:
Latex failed to resolve 1 reference(s)
Latexmk: Errors, so I did not complete making targets
Collected error summary (may duplicate other messages):
pdflatex: Command for 'pdflatex' gave return code 256
Latexmk: Use the -f option to force complete processing,
unless error was exceeding maximum runs of latex/pdflatex.
make: *** [paper.pdf] Error 12


If I run make again that plot was built, but it does the same thing with another one.



If I keep running make it eventually builds all my plots one by one (I have several plots, some of which take a while to generate so I'd like to keep the scripts to generate them separate).



How can I make it so that it builds everything in one go, regardless of which and how many files need to be regenerated?



EDIT I guess I forgot to mention that my other goal here is to avoid manually stating every .tex/.pgf/.pdf file dependency in my Makefile. If I do that, there's no point to using latexmk. I've done the manual Makefile before, but I'm always forgetting to update the dependency graph whenever I add a new file or rearrange things. My understanding is that the strength of latexmk is that it can figure that stuff out automatically. If I can get something that does that, that would be ideal. That and latexmk automatically rebuilds the paper and bib files as many times as necessary.



EDIT 2
I tried using the suggestion from the output, to use the -f flag to latexmk. This builds about 5 or so plots, then errors with



Rule 'pdflatex': File changes, etc:
Changed files, or newly in use since previous run(s):
'origen-meeseeks.pgf'
Latexmk: Maximum runs of pdflatex reached without getting stable files
Failure to make 'paper.pdf'
Latexmk: Errors, in force_mode: so I tried finishing targets
Collected error summary (may duplicate other messages):
pdflatex: Command for 'pdflatex' gave return code 256
Latexmk: Did not finish processing file 'paper':
'pdflatex' needed too many passes
make: *** [paper.pdf] Error 12
transmutagen-papermaster*=$latexmk -


So it almost does what I want. How do I increase the max number of passes?







luatex latexmk makefile






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 16 '17 at 21:38







asmeurer

















asked Nov 15 '17 at 23:04









asmeurerasmeurer

274215




274215













  • I don't know about latexmk. However, for make, you need to tell it that the final PDF requires the plot's PDF. Then it will know not to apply the rule to make the final PDF until it has made the plot's PDF. (Or the plot's PGF or whatever it needs.) Then you just need a rule to make the plot's PDF. That's how make works: you tell it what ingredients each target needs and provide a recipe for turning the ingredients into the target. One target can have another target as an ingredient and make will figure out what to do in what order.

    – cfr
    Nov 16 '17 at 2:39






  • 1





    So %.pdf: %.tex shouldn't tell make that only one ingredient is needed for all PDFs because that's a lie! One of the PDFs needs another ingredient, so you need to list that ingredient, too.

    – cfr
    Nov 16 '17 at 2:41











  • I'm also by no means an expert on latexmk, but isn't it odd to use latexmk inside a make file, especially when latexmk is (additionally) told to (try to) 'use make?

    – jon
    Nov 16 '17 at 3:10













  • It is weird. My idea was that make would call latexmk (without me having to type all the arguments each time like -lualatex), then latexmk would call make to build the dependencies. So it shouldn't actually require the dependencies in the Makefile, because it's a separate make process that builds the plots.

    – asmeurer
    Nov 16 '17 at 21:15











  • In the way of using latexmk given in the first Makefile, the options given to latexmk tell it to generate dependency information in a form that is read by make when it executes the -include line. That's been removed from the second version, which shows an incorrect way of calling latexmk from a Makefile. The first Makefile is a good way of combining the use of latexmk and make.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:02



















  • I don't know about latexmk. However, for make, you need to tell it that the final PDF requires the plot's PDF. Then it will know not to apply the rule to make the final PDF until it has made the plot's PDF. (Or the plot's PGF or whatever it needs.) Then you just need a rule to make the plot's PDF. That's how make works: you tell it what ingredients each target needs and provide a recipe for turning the ingredients into the target. One target can have another target as an ingredient and make will figure out what to do in what order.

    – cfr
    Nov 16 '17 at 2:39






  • 1





    So %.pdf: %.tex shouldn't tell make that only one ingredient is needed for all PDFs because that's a lie! One of the PDFs needs another ingredient, so you need to list that ingredient, too.

    – cfr
    Nov 16 '17 at 2:41











  • I'm also by no means an expert on latexmk, but isn't it odd to use latexmk inside a make file, especially when latexmk is (additionally) told to (try to) 'use make?

    – jon
    Nov 16 '17 at 3:10













  • It is weird. My idea was that make would call latexmk (without me having to type all the arguments each time like -lualatex), then latexmk would call make to build the dependencies. So it shouldn't actually require the dependencies in the Makefile, because it's a separate make process that builds the plots.

    – asmeurer
    Nov 16 '17 at 21:15











  • In the way of using latexmk given in the first Makefile, the options given to latexmk tell it to generate dependency information in a form that is read by make when it executes the -include line. That's been removed from the second version, which shows an incorrect way of calling latexmk from a Makefile. The first Makefile is a good way of combining the use of latexmk and make.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:02

















I don't know about latexmk. However, for make, you need to tell it that the final PDF requires the plot's PDF. Then it will know not to apply the rule to make the final PDF until it has made the plot's PDF. (Or the plot's PGF or whatever it needs.) Then you just need a rule to make the plot's PDF. That's how make works: you tell it what ingredients each target needs and provide a recipe for turning the ingredients into the target. One target can have another target as an ingredient and make will figure out what to do in what order.

– cfr
Nov 16 '17 at 2:39





I don't know about latexmk. However, for make, you need to tell it that the final PDF requires the plot's PDF. Then it will know not to apply the rule to make the final PDF until it has made the plot's PDF. (Or the plot's PGF or whatever it needs.) Then you just need a rule to make the plot's PDF. That's how make works: you tell it what ingredients each target needs and provide a recipe for turning the ingredients into the target. One target can have another target as an ingredient and make will figure out what to do in what order.

– cfr
Nov 16 '17 at 2:39




1




1





So %.pdf: %.tex shouldn't tell make that only one ingredient is needed for all PDFs because that's a lie! One of the PDFs needs another ingredient, so you need to list that ingredient, too.

– cfr
Nov 16 '17 at 2:41





So %.pdf: %.tex shouldn't tell make that only one ingredient is needed for all PDFs because that's a lie! One of the PDFs needs another ingredient, so you need to list that ingredient, too.

– cfr
Nov 16 '17 at 2:41













I'm also by no means an expert on latexmk, but isn't it odd to use latexmk inside a make file, especially when latexmk is (additionally) told to (try to) 'use make?

– jon
Nov 16 '17 at 3:10







I'm also by no means an expert on latexmk, but isn't it odd to use latexmk inside a make file, especially when latexmk is (additionally) told to (try to) 'use make?

– jon
Nov 16 '17 at 3:10















It is weird. My idea was that make would call latexmk (without me having to type all the arguments each time like -lualatex), then latexmk would call make to build the dependencies. So it shouldn't actually require the dependencies in the Makefile, because it's a separate make process that builds the plots.

– asmeurer
Nov 16 '17 at 21:15





It is weird. My idea was that make would call latexmk (without me having to type all the arguments each time like -lualatex), then latexmk would call make to build the dependencies. So it shouldn't actually require the dependencies in the Makefile, because it's a separate make process that builds the plots.

– asmeurer
Nov 16 '17 at 21:15













In the way of using latexmk given in the first Makefile, the options given to latexmk tell it to generate dependency information in a form that is read by make when it executes the -include line. That's been removed from the second version, which shows an incorrect way of calling latexmk from a Makefile. The first Makefile is a good way of combining the use of latexmk and make.

– John Collins
Nov 18 '17 at 23:02





In the way of using latexmk given in the first Makefile, the options given to latexmk tell it to generate dependency information in a form that is read by make when it executes the -include line. That's been removed from the second version, which shows an incorrect way of calling latexmk from a Makefile. The first Makefile is a good way of combining the use of latexmk and make.

– John Collins
Nov 18 '17 at 23:02










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1














As I noted in my edit, if you add the -f flag to latexmk, it continues after each plot is generated and tries again.



Unfortunately, these "re-runs" are counted as part of the number of times latexmk calls latex to build the document. By default, it only does 5 of these, but you can modify this with a configuration parameter. Create a file .latexmkrc in the directory with your tex files and add



$max_repeat = 10


(replace 10 with some number bigger than the number of plots you have, probably at least 5 more than that).



I personally would consider these to be bugs in latexmk (building more than a single thing with make shouldn't require -f, each call to make shouldn't count against the max_repeat).



You also do need to add the file dependencies manually in the Makefile



paper.pdf: some-plot.pgf


I don't know if there's a way to make the -MF stuff from latexmk work properly with just one Make run that both generates and uses them.






share|improve this answer


























  • I agree that if the only error from lualatex is a missing file error, and the file gets created, then it appears to be a good idea not to count the run towards the maximum. I'll consider this for another release. As I wrote in another comment, I normally find it better to use -interaction=nonstopmode to get all the missing-file errors in one batch. Only for later invocations would -halt-on-error be natural.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:16






  • 1





    However, for missing files, you shouldn't need the -f option. Latexmk is intended to continue processing after the missing file is made, which is different from it's behavior with other kinds of error. So there's probably some other difficulty either in latexmk's interaction with make or elsewhere. It's probably going to be too hard to work this out here. You could contact me offline (at the address in the latexmk documentation).

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:22











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f401540%2fhow-to-build-a-makefile-that-builds-a-latex-document-with-dependencies-in-one-ru%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









1














As I noted in my edit, if you add the -f flag to latexmk, it continues after each plot is generated and tries again.



Unfortunately, these "re-runs" are counted as part of the number of times latexmk calls latex to build the document. By default, it only does 5 of these, but you can modify this with a configuration parameter. Create a file .latexmkrc in the directory with your tex files and add



$max_repeat = 10


(replace 10 with some number bigger than the number of plots you have, probably at least 5 more than that).



I personally would consider these to be bugs in latexmk (building more than a single thing with make shouldn't require -f, each call to make shouldn't count against the max_repeat).



You also do need to add the file dependencies manually in the Makefile



paper.pdf: some-plot.pgf


I don't know if there's a way to make the -MF stuff from latexmk work properly with just one Make run that both generates and uses them.






share|improve this answer


























  • I agree that if the only error from lualatex is a missing file error, and the file gets created, then it appears to be a good idea not to count the run towards the maximum. I'll consider this for another release. As I wrote in another comment, I normally find it better to use -interaction=nonstopmode to get all the missing-file errors in one batch. Only for later invocations would -halt-on-error be natural.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:16






  • 1





    However, for missing files, you shouldn't need the -f option. Latexmk is intended to continue processing after the missing file is made, which is different from it's behavior with other kinds of error. So there's probably some other difficulty either in latexmk's interaction with make or elsewhere. It's probably going to be too hard to work this out here. You could contact me offline (at the address in the latexmk documentation).

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:22
















1














As I noted in my edit, if you add the -f flag to latexmk, it continues after each plot is generated and tries again.



Unfortunately, these "re-runs" are counted as part of the number of times latexmk calls latex to build the document. By default, it only does 5 of these, but you can modify this with a configuration parameter. Create a file .latexmkrc in the directory with your tex files and add



$max_repeat = 10


(replace 10 with some number bigger than the number of plots you have, probably at least 5 more than that).



I personally would consider these to be bugs in latexmk (building more than a single thing with make shouldn't require -f, each call to make shouldn't count against the max_repeat).



You also do need to add the file dependencies manually in the Makefile



paper.pdf: some-plot.pgf


I don't know if there's a way to make the -MF stuff from latexmk work properly with just one Make run that both generates and uses them.






share|improve this answer


























  • I agree that if the only error from lualatex is a missing file error, and the file gets created, then it appears to be a good idea not to count the run towards the maximum. I'll consider this for another release. As I wrote in another comment, I normally find it better to use -interaction=nonstopmode to get all the missing-file errors in one batch. Only for later invocations would -halt-on-error be natural.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:16






  • 1





    However, for missing files, you shouldn't need the -f option. Latexmk is intended to continue processing after the missing file is made, which is different from it's behavior with other kinds of error. So there's probably some other difficulty either in latexmk's interaction with make or elsewhere. It's probably going to be too hard to work this out here. You could contact me offline (at the address in the latexmk documentation).

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:22














1












1








1







As I noted in my edit, if you add the -f flag to latexmk, it continues after each plot is generated and tries again.



Unfortunately, these "re-runs" are counted as part of the number of times latexmk calls latex to build the document. By default, it only does 5 of these, but you can modify this with a configuration parameter. Create a file .latexmkrc in the directory with your tex files and add



$max_repeat = 10


(replace 10 with some number bigger than the number of plots you have, probably at least 5 more than that).



I personally would consider these to be bugs in latexmk (building more than a single thing with make shouldn't require -f, each call to make shouldn't count against the max_repeat).



You also do need to add the file dependencies manually in the Makefile



paper.pdf: some-plot.pgf


I don't know if there's a way to make the -MF stuff from latexmk work properly with just one Make run that both generates and uses them.






share|improve this answer















As I noted in my edit, if you add the -f flag to latexmk, it continues after each plot is generated and tries again.



Unfortunately, these "re-runs" are counted as part of the number of times latexmk calls latex to build the document. By default, it only does 5 of these, but you can modify this with a configuration parameter. Create a file .latexmkrc in the directory with your tex files and add



$max_repeat = 10


(replace 10 with some number bigger than the number of plots you have, probably at least 5 more than that).



I personally would consider these to be bugs in latexmk (building more than a single thing with make shouldn't require -f, each call to make shouldn't count against the max_repeat).



You also do need to add the file dependencies manually in the Makefile



paper.pdf: some-plot.pgf


I don't know if there's a way to make the -MF stuff from latexmk work properly with just one Make run that both generates and uses them.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 1 min ago

























answered Nov 16 '17 at 21:48









asmeurerasmeurer

274215




274215













  • I agree that if the only error from lualatex is a missing file error, and the file gets created, then it appears to be a good idea not to count the run towards the maximum. I'll consider this for another release. As I wrote in another comment, I normally find it better to use -interaction=nonstopmode to get all the missing-file errors in one batch. Only for later invocations would -halt-on-error be natural.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:16






  • 1





    However, for missing files, you shouldn't need the -f option. Latexmk is intended to continue processing after the missing file is made, which is different from it's behavior with other kinds of error. So there's probably some other difficulty either in latexmk's interaction with make or elsewhere. It's probably going to be too hard to work this out here. You could contact me offline (at the address in the latexmk documentation).

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:22



















  • I agree that if the only error from lualatex is a missing file error, and the file gets created, then it appears to be a good idea not to count the run towards the maximum. I'll consider this for another release. As I wrote in another comment, I normally find it better to use -interaction=nonstopmode to get all the missing-file errors in one batch. Only for later invocations would -halt-on-error be natural.

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:16






  • 1





    However, for missing files, you shouldn't need the -f option. Latexmk is intended to continue processing after the missing file is made, which is different from it's behavior with other kinds of error. So there's probably some other difficulty either in latexmk's interaction with make or elsewhere. It's probably going to be too hard to work this out here. You could contact me offline (at the address in the latexmk documentation).

    – John Collins
    Nov 18 '17 at 23:22

















I agree that if the only error from lualatex is a missing file error, and the file gets created, then it appears to be a good idea not to count the run towards the maximum. I'll consider this for another release. As I wrote in another comment, I normally find it better to use -interaction=nonstopmode to get all the missing-file errors in one batch. Only for later invocations would -halt-on-error be natural.

– John Collins
Nov 18 '17 at 23:16





I agree that if the only error from lualatex is a missing file error, and the file gets created, then it appears to be a good idea not to count the run towards the maximum. I'll consider this for another release. As I wrote in another comment, I normally find it better to use -interaction=nonstopmode to get all the missing-file errors in one batch. Only for later invocations would -halt-on-error be natural.

– John Collins
Nov 18 '17 at 23:16




1




1





However, for missing files, you shouldn't need the -f option. Latexmk is intended to continue processing after the missing file is made, which is different from it's behavior with other kinds of error. So there's probably some other difficulty either in latexmk's interaction with make or elsewhere. It's probably going to be too hard to work this out here. You could contact me offline (at the address in the latexmk documentation).

– John Collins
Nov 18 '17 at 23:22





However, for missing files, you shouldn't need the -f option. Latexmk is intended to continue processing after the missing file is made, which is different from it's behavior with other kinds of error. So there's probably some other difficulty either in latexmk's interaction with make or elsewhere. It's probably going to be too hard to work this out here. You could contact me offline (at the address in the latexmk documentation).

– John Collins
Nov 18 '17 at 23:22


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f401540%2fhow-to-build-a-makefile-that-builds-a-latex-document-with-dependencies-in-one-ru%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Installing LyX: “No textclass is found.”LyX installation error- text class not found- 'Reconfigure' or...

(1602) Indiana Índice Designación y nombre Características orbitales Véase...

Universidad Autónoma de Occidente Índice Historia Campus Facultades Programas Académicos Medios de...