Defining control sequence \blx@noerroretextools for biblatex

Question

It seems like the biblatex interface changed slightly, and it now asks that a control sequence is defined to toggle a certain behaviour rather than an option passed to the package.

The option 'noerroretextools' is deprecated.
(biblatex)  Define the control sequence '\blx@noerroretextools'
(biblatex)  before loading biblatex instead.

This is probably blindgly obvious, but how do I define said control sequence? Seems like the @ character is causing me trouble if I try just using \newcommand.

Maybe try something like \makeatletter\newcommand{\blx@noerroretextools}{}\makeatother. If this does not help, please provide a test file. — samcarter_is_at_topanswers.xyz, Dec 20 '23 at 22:13
why do you use that option at all? It is only there as a work around for the etextools package which you shouldn't use anyway. — Ulrike Fischer, Dec 20 '23 at 22:39
To use the autonum package. If you have a suggestion for a different package that fills a similar niche and doesn't require workarounds, I'm all ears. — Oxonon, Dec 21 '23 at 04:51
One of the reasons why I wouldn't use autonum https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/703076/autonum-and-restatable-incompatible#comment1749015_703076 — Ulrike Fischer, Dec 21 '23 at 07:18
I still have the same question: if not autonum, how else to handle equation numbering? Surely not manually? — Oxonon, Dec 21 '23 at 08:07

score 1 · Accepted Answer · answered Jan 03 '24 at 12:37

The shown error can be avoided by defining the command \blx@noerroretextools before loading biblatex and not passing the noerroretextools option to biblatex.

So instead of loading biblatex as follows

\usepackage[noerroretextools]{biblatex}

you could try

\makeatletter
\newcommand{\blx@noerroretextools}{}
\makeatother
\usepackage{biblatex}

as suggested by samcarter_is_at_topanswers.xyz in the comments.

But if you use this trick, you absolutely need to make sure that etextools does not overwrite any of the etoolbox commands that biblatex needs. You can find some discussions over at Biblatex and newtxmath are not working together, https://github.com/plk/biblatex/issues/669. The code you are using at the moment may already do that, but there is no way of knowing if this is the case. That's why biblatex makes it hard for you to just load etextools: Unless you (or the code you load) actively make sure to restore the required etoolbox definitions, things will break with random error messages.

Thanks for taking the time to get this off the unanswered list! — samcarter_is_at_topanswers.xyz, Jan 03 '24 at 12:55

Defining control sequence \blx@noerroretextools for biblatex

1 Answers1