Andrew Koenig wrote:
So if pages 19-50 were missing, that would be exactly
two signatures, just the kind of problem that one might expect to find if
there were a mechanical error in the printing process.
Anyway, that's my guess. I would appreciate confirmation of the exact
numbers of the missing pages, either publicly or by private email.
Ok, I'm gonna be a pedant here. What I originally wrote was "I suggest you
count the pages _between_ page 18 and page 51." The pages missing are those
which should lie between 18 and 51, i.e., 19 through 50, inclusive. Yes,
that does seem to constitute a reasonable count and numbering for a couple
of signatures. Typically when a signature is omitted in my printing
operation it is due to operator error:
hattons@ljosalfr:/download/org/gnu/gcc-3.4.0/gcc/
Fri Aug 27 15:24:37:> cat $(which make-book.sh)
#!/bin/bash
SIGNATURE=20
usage="make-book.sh [-s signature] filename"
while getopts ":s:w:c:" opt; do
case $opt in
s ) SIGNATURE=$OPTARG ;;
\? ) echo $usage
exit 1 ;;
esac
done
shift $(($OPTIND - 1))
FILE_NAME=$1
psbook -s$SIGNATURE $FILE_NAME | psnup -pletter -2 >
${FILE_NAME%.ps}-book.ps;
hattons@ljosalfr:/download/org/gnu/gcc-3.4.0/gcc/
Fri Aug 27 15:25:12:>
But the lack of confirmation from others suggests to me it was an isolated
mechanical anomaly which produced the defect. I really have little concept
of the machinery used to mass produce books. At this point it's just idle
curiosity, but I would really like to understand /how/ this happened. I
would expect such an incongruence to be fairly noticeable to the machine
operator. Perhaps they simply let it pass on the assumption that 'it'll
show up eventually'.
--
"[M]y dislike for the preprocessor is well known. Cpp is essential in C
programming, and still important in conventional C++ implementations, but
it is a hack, and so are most of the techniques that rely on it. ...I think
the time has come to be serious about macro-free C++ programming." - B. S.