j2kun / chktex-action

A Github action to lint a LaTeX file for style and formatting issues.

Lint your LaTeX files with chktex

chktex is a LaTeX linter. A linter is a program that checks your work for stylistic errors. In the case of LaTeX, style errors include soft tex-O's (which don't generate errors) and decisions that result in rendering irregularities.

This action runs chktex on all .tex files in your repository.

To configure the linter, add a .chktexrc file to your repository. An example is provided in this repo.

Example configuration: https://gist.github.com/j2kun/aa4a768150d423f581b758103b2b020c

# in .github/workflows/lint.yml

name: Lint

on: 
  push:
    branches:
      - main
  pull_request:
    branches:
      - main


jobs:
  build:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
    - uses: actions/checkout@v1
    - name: LaTeX linter (chktex)
      uses: j2kun/chktex-action@main
      env:
        GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}

chktex-action's Issues

Improve detection of files that need to be linted

See if I can have a pull request workflow that runs lint only on the .tex files that are edited in the pull request.

Inputs in subfolders produce wrong errors

When using \input in a subfolder, this chktex-action will fail, because the filename will not be found.
Suppose the following file structure:

main.tex
A/a1.tex
A/a2.tex

where main.tex does \input{A/a1.tex}, and in turn A/a1.tex does \input{A/a2.tex}. This will compile fine, and running chktex on any file from the main folder will succeed.

In the current implementation of this action, however, the following line leads to an error, as the file is checked from within the subfolder.
This issue is trivially fixed by deleting the lines but in cases where the main tex file is in a subfolder, this will lead to errors in turn.

Is there a way to detect the 'main' tex file for a given file and only check from the respective working directory, or is there no way to prevent those errors (other than having \inputs only in the main file)?

Change to a more descriptive README

Hello,

The README is currently rather minimalistic (no Usage, License etc.)

https://www.makeareadme.com/ is a great resource.

Here is what I find most important:

• Usage (how to include into workflow)
• Quirks (e.g. "\input"s are ignored)