3

After a reinstallation of a newer version of MiKTeX the citations created by biblatex are broken. I have no idea what causes this. A similar issue could be fixed by deleting all auxillary files but that does not help here.

Here is my non-working MWE:

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{test.bib}
@BOOK{test,
author= {A. Author},
title = {A Title for a Book},
date = {2012-10-08}
},
@ONLINE{test2,
author = {A. Author},
title = {Some title},
url = {http://example.com},
urldate = {2013-01-08}
}
\end{filecontents}


\usepackage[%
backend=biber,
citestyle=authoryear,
bibstyle=authoryear,
]{biblatex}


\addbibresource{test.bib}


\begin{document}
Here is a first citation: \cite{test}.
\nocite{*}


\printbibliography
\end{document}

With the output:

Here is a first citation: A Title for a Book.

References

Author, A. Some title. url: http://example.com (visited on 01/08/2013).

— A Title for a Book.

How can I get the normal citations back?

Community
  • 1
Alexander
  • 9,163
  • What do the logs say (*.blg, *.log)? – Audrey Jun 25 '13 at 13:21
  • @Audrey: Oh, I found something that might be a hint: the .blg contains: [115] Utils.pm:167> WARN - Warning: Found biblatex control file version 2.4, expected version 2.3 and the .log: Package biblatex Warning: File 'no_month.bbl' is wrong format version - expected 2.2. This is all on an uptodate MiKTeX 2.9 install. – Alexander Jun 25 '13 at 13:27
  • @Audrey: That turned out to be a great hint. It seems that MiKTeX is going through some restructuring at the moment. It installed biblatex 2.6 together with biber 1.5. This causes the error. Installing a newer biber 1.6 by hand fixes the issue. Thank you! – Alexander Jun 25 '13 at 13:40
  • No problem. biber 1.5 is indeed not compatible with biblatex 1.6. You can find a table of compatible versions in the biblatex manual. – Audrey Jun 25 '13 at 14:15
  • I already have for some time biber 2.6 in a current miktex and I don't see any update in the manager which could revert this to biber 2.5. But if you have a 64bit miktex then it doesn't come with biber and you will have to update it manually everytime biblatex is updated. – Ulrike Fischer Jun 25 '13 at 14:24
  • @UlrikeFischer: I have no idea why it installed biber 1.5, I used the basic installer (32 bit) a few hours ago and let it run through with the nearest repository as the source. – Alexander Jun 25 '13 at 15:48
  • I just run an update on another PC (which hasn't been updated for some time) and got biber 1.6. The biber package and the biblatex package have been packaged the same day (in may). So it is quite odd if you got biblatex 2.6 and biber 1.5 from a repository. – Ulrike Fischer Jun 25 '13 at 16:29

0 Answers0