Undefined CS with entry sets about biblatex

[josephwright]

Which versiosn of everything are we talking about here?

[aboruvka]

The dev branch (also available on SF) with biber 1.0.

[plk]

I have just committed an attempted fix to the dev branch - can you check? It's not clear if the addset* macros are really needed with biber, if I revert them to the original 1.7 definitions, the problem seems to be gone with biber. They now don't touch any data structures used when backend=biber.

[aboruvka]

biblatex.sty in the dev branch doesn't have the changes needed for related entries. After adding those, I get a different error on the first latex run after biber:

ERROR: Undefined control sequence.

--- TeX said ---
l.22   \sortlist
                {entry}{}

[plk]

Something strange is happening with git branches and merging I think. I have pulled everything and merged related into dev (nothing new to merge it says) and it's fine for me. The dev on github should have all the related entries stuff merged into it and should be completely up to date. That error suggests an earlier biblatex.sty without any of the printbibliography changes in there? Does your active biblatex.sty have:

\let\sortlist\blx@bbl@slist

?

[aboruvka]

Sorry - I must've been updating wrong. I pulled all of dev this time and built TDS. It now runs without errors, but the backends generate different output. biber gives:

[1] Sheldon Glashow. "Partial Symmetries ofWeak Interactions". In: Nucl. Phys.
22 (1961), pp. 579-588; Steven Weinberg. "A Model of Leptons". In: Phys. Rev. Lett.
19 (1967), pp. 1264-1266.

bibtex gives:

[1] Sheldon Glashow. "Partial Symmetries ofWeak Interactions". In: Nucl. Phys.
22 (1961), pp. 579-588; Steven Weinberg. \A Model of Leptons". In: Phys. Rev. Lett.
19 (1967), pp. 1264-1266.
[2] Sheldon Glashow. "Partial Symmetries ofWeak Interactions". In: Nucl. Phys.
22 (1961), pp. 579-588.
[3] Steven Weinberg. "A Model of Leptons". In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967),
pp. 1264-1266.

In the manual I recall that PL states that citing an entry set does (in part) the equivalent of

\nocite{<entryset>}

So I think the bibtex output is more in line of what is expected. Not sure if this discrepancy is a big deal, though.

[plk]

I think that's because bibtex needs some extra fields to deal with sets (se pp. 121-122 of the 1.7 doc). If you add these and do latex-bibtex-latex-bibtex (manual says you will needs extra runs with sets and bibtex), then it looks like the biber version for me?

[aboruvka]

I can't seem to replicate the biber output with bibtex. But biblatex 1.7 and bibtex/biber 0.9.9 is consistent with the output above, so I think you've fixed this issue.

[plk]

Try with this .bib, just \cite{set}. Run latex, bibtex, latex, bibtex, latex.

@set{set,
 entryset = {glashow,weinberg},
 crossref = {glashow},
 annotation = {A \texttt{set} with two members}}
@article{glashow,
 entryset = {set},
 author = {Glashow, Sheldon},
 title = {Partial Symmetries of Weak Interactions},
 journaltitle = {Nucl.~Phys.},
 volume = {22},
 date = {1961},
 pages = {579--588}}
@article{weinberg,
 entryset = {set},
 author = {Weinberg, Steven},
 title = {A Model of Leptons},
 journaltitle = {Phys.~Rev.~Lett.},
 volume = {19},
 date = {1967},
 pages = {1264--1266}}

[aboruvka]

Ah, got it. Order matters - the set needs to appear in the bib file first.

[plk]

Yes, another of the reasons it would be nice to have a biblatex release with no bibtex support - the code is a bit hairy in the .sty and PL was really keen to clean it up and make a biber only release.

[aboruvka]

The code did get quite a bit hairier with the new biber-only sorting features. Perhaps we can revisit this discussion with Joseph.