I am using a the Tufte-\LaTeX class and compiling it in TextMate, which has a nifty LaTeX bundle and latexmk interface. The document is getting long, and I get heaps of these:  LaTeX Warning: Marginpar on page 31 moved.   This is mostly due to how the footnotes are handled by the class, and thus rarely of interest to me. From time to time, I also get this from my fonts:  LaTeX Font Warning: Font shape `OT1/zi4/m/it' undefined   As it happens, these issues are (really) trivial to me, but I do care about the other issues that get lost in the huge list of warnings.  Is there a way to suppress either all or a selection of warnings from my log? I could not find much on that topic by searching here or elsewhere.  (For the moment, it seems that my only option is to reprogram the TextMate bundle to display warnings, e.g., in minuscule text.)
Here is a minimal example that showcases my problem:  \documentclass{article}  \usepackage{amsthm} \usepackage{hyperref} \usepackage{cleveref}  \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem} \newtheorem{lem}[thm]{Lemma}  \begin{document}  \begin{lem} Lemma \end{lem}  \end{document}   The warning I get is the following:  [1pdfTeX warning (ext4): destination with the same identifier (name{thm.1}) has been already used, duplicate ignored  \AtBegShi@Output ...ipout \box \AtBeginShipoutBox                                                    \fi \fi  l.16 \end{document}                    {&lt;install dir&gt;/MiKTeX/2.9/pdftex/config/pdftex.map}]   I know that it is just a warning and that, my document will still work perfectly fine with regards to cross-referencing and hyperlinking, but I would still like to know why I am getting this warning and if anything can be done to fix it without removing functionality of the included packages.   Bonus question: Whats going on behind the scenes when this warning (or any generic 'destination with the same identifier (name{XXX.YYY}) has been already used, duplicate ignored') is produced, as this is not limited to theorem environments.  From log file:  Package: amsthm 2004/08/06 v2.20 Package: hyperref 2011/04/17 v6.82g Hypertext links for LaTeX Package: cleveref.sty 2011/03/22 v0.17.9 Intelligent cross-referencing Package cleveref Info: `hyperref' support loaded on input line 2157. Package cleveref Info: `amsthm' support loaded on input line 2300.
Apparently I inadvertently irked a moderator by creating a tag.  The moderator told me that my tag was "meta" and therefore not appropriate.  Having been a SO user for a long time (and a lurker on MetaSO), it was not clear to me what makes my tag "meta" and why meta tags would be inappropriate.  Many of the questions I see on SO aren't really about the topics in the title or the existing tag list.  For example, , isn't really about C++ or SetWindowText (or the Windows API as tagged).  It's simply somebody who had a bug, couldn't find it, and tried to outsource the debugging.  This seems to be a common category of question on SO.  So I started tagged questions like this with the label "findmybug".  Lots of frequent SO contributors regularly answer questions in this category rather than voting to close them as "Too Localized".  I took that as a cue that I should also try to answer rather than voting to close.  But leaving these questions open and tagged with "c++" and "winapi" even though the question isn't really about C++ or the Windows API seemed misleading.  Someone searching for answers on using SetWindowText from C++ probably isn't making exactly the same mistake and won't find that entry useful.  (In the end, the sample question was closed as "Too Localized", but this doesn't seem common for these types of questions.)  The Tags page says:     A tag is a keyword or label that categorizes your question with other, similar questions. Using the right tags makes it easier for others to find and answer your question.   It seems to me that the "findmybug" tag does group these similar questions together.  So from that perspective, it seems to fit.  Lots of users seem to enjoy answering these types of questions, so it makes sense they'd want a way to find them.  If you want to suggest that all the questions I would tag as "findmybug" should be closed as "Too Localized", that's fine.  But I'm trying to ask the more general question:  What makes a tag meta, and are meta tags inappropriate? Is the .minecraft folder hidden on a Mac? I have a friend who is playing with me on a server we've created. Unfortunately, he is on a  Mac whereas I am on a Windows machine. I told him that I should be able to compile and send a .minecraft folder to him so that we can both play. Unfortunately, he can't find his .minecraft folder where it is supposed to be. Is it hidden and how can I unhide it? Attack moving or Attack Canceling I watch streams sometimes and i see the high elo Ranged AD move between each shot. Do they gain anything with this? And if so whats a good way to practice it. Retrieving HTTP status code from loaded iframe with Javascript How to send form input values and invoke a method in JSF bean counting number of specific string in each row Does Wasserstein distance require the source and target distributions to have the same mass? If we minimize the Wasserstein loss, $$W_1 (P_S, P_T) = \underset{\gamma \in \Pi}{\text{min }} \sum_{x,y} |x-y|\gamma(x,y)$$ which means we are looking for the coupling $\gamma(x,y)$ that minimizes the cost of moving mass from the source distribution $P_S$ to the target distribution $P_T$,  Do the masses of the source and target distributions have to be identical? If so or not, how are the masses of $P_T$ and $P_S$ accounted for mathematically in, or when minimizing, the shown formula, or what might be missing/overlooked by the Wasserstein approach overall due to the mass differences? How to "flatten" a multi-dimensional array to simple one in PHP? It's probably beginner question but I'm going through documentation for longer time already and I can't find any solution. I thought I could use implode for each dimension and then put those strings back together with str_split to make new simple array. However I never know if the join pattern isn't also in values and so after doing str_split my original values could break.  Is there something like combine($array1, $array2) for arrays inside of multi-dimensional array? How do I restore the Unity 7 Ctrl-Alt-Numpad combination behaviour on Gnome 3? By default, instead of doing something useful, the Ctrl-Alt-Numpad key combination in Gnome 3 shoves a window in the specified direction across the entire workspace. These shortcuts do not show in the Gnome 3 keyboard settings panel; they're just there, and they're in the way.  How can I get this behavior back in Ubuntu 17.10? What's the best way of checking if an object property in JavaScript is undefined? I commonly use the word 'guys' to refer to a group of males colloquially. It's colloquial but not rude, off putting, condescending, patronizing (though I wouldn't use it with a group of men at a board meeting (hypothetically of course), unless I knew them). So, some that I would not consider as replacements would be    buddies: too old-fashioned dudes: too informal boys: too patronizing men, gentlemen: too formal or false respect   I realized that I had also been using it for any group of people, males and females, even just females. It worked for me and I didn't think of the gender implications, that women might not care for it. No one ever complained, directly or indirectly (rule of life: sometimes people don't complain about things they should).   But it occurred to me (maybe by reading something that sparked realization) that the intended hearers might not all care for it.  What might be a female gendered or non-gendered version of 'guys'?  Some that I've considered don't feel right about (though these may be reasonable answers) are:   dolls: too old-fashioned babes: too informal  ladies: too formal or I've heard from women, too creepy women: too factual girls: too patronizing (as much as 'boys') everyone, you all: too bland y'all: perfectly non-sexist but too regional (might work, but not everywhere)   Hopefully I haven't eliminated all the possibilities -- any suggestions? Why do we use the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian instead of other related functions? There are 4 main functions in mechanics. $L(q,\dot{q},t)$, $H(p,q,t)$, $K(\dot{p},\dot{q},t)$, $G(p,\dot{p},t)$. First two are Lagrangian and Hamiltonian. Second two are some kind of analogical to first two, but we don't use them. Every where they write that using them can cause problems. But why? Windows 7 time issues What do the brackets around processes mean? $ ps -Awwo pid,comm,args   PID COMMAND         COMMAND     1 init            /sbin/init     2 kthreadd        [kthreadd]     3 ksoftirqd/0     [ksoftirqd/0]     5 kworker/u:0     [kworker/u:0]     6 migration/0     [migration/0]     7 cpuset          [cpuset]     8 khelper         [khelper]     9 netns           [netns]    10 sync_supers     [sync_supers]    11 bdi-default     [bdi-default]    12 kintegrityd     [kintegrityd]    13 kblockd         [kblockd]    14 kacpid          [kacpid]    15 kacpi_notify    [kacpi_notify]    16 kacpi_hotplug   [kacpi_hotplug]    17 ata_sff         [ata_sff]    18 khubd           [khubd]   What do the brackets mean? Does args always return the full path to the process command (e.g. /bin/cat)? show that a distance function is continuous Will tcpdump see packets that are being dropped by iptables? I have two different list. In the first list are some people picker columns.  Is it possible to create a lookup column for list 2 to add the user from the first list? I know it isn't supported in Sharepoint, but i hope someone have an idea to solve my problem. How to pad zeroes to a string? It is a common assumption (and, as far as historical stock market data goes, also proven) that the stock market is always growing if you enlarge the time window long enough . In other words: The stock market always goes up in the long term. Is, therefore, the conclusion valid that you can totally invest as much as you want at any point in time you want and you can never go wrong, if  You diversify strong enough (invest &quot;in the world&quot;) You do not need to urgently sell your assets at any point in time  If yes, all that strategies that rely also on diversified, long-term investments (Dollar-Cost-Averaging &amp; Rebalancing, .. what others do you know?) are just to optimize the yiels, but you'd make profit even without those strategies. Is that correct? I've seen lately that new question editing is stored somewhere for later use if we wander off the new question without posting it and then return back to the page. Which is a good functionality addition in it's own right.  What I'd like to also have is the Discard this draft functionality that would clear form data and forget it. Somehow we find an answer in the meantime and the question isn't valid any more.  So having a Discard saved draft or something similar would be a nice contra-functionality to auto-save to remove stored data. The way it's implemented now seems too hidden hidden and unpredictable to users.  Additional edit  When adding hidden auto functionality usually means creating the opposite as well by either giving the possibility to preference of not having automatism at all or giving the possibility to clear what's been auto saved.  Let's see how GMail doesn't work (and I think we all agree that from UX perspective it does the job as expected:   User clicks Compose message User starts writing a new email message User decides to not send the message and checks their inbox User clicks Compose message again A clean form is presented to user (old one being part of drafts)   I'm not suggesting we should have something like Saved drafts but we surely should have the possibility to clear previous question draft.  Since this new functionality was introduced I should point out that I would use the discard functionality more frequently than the saved one. I do welcome saving messages, but discarding of saved drafts is anything but a rare situation one might want to do. It wouldn't be a problem if this was a 1% against 99%. To me it's more like 50/50.  Best possible solution  When providing saved drafts there should (from the UX perspective) be the opposite functionality as well. Namely discarding of it. But first thing we should be asking ourselves is:    do users more frequently need pre-filled saved question draft or do users more frequently need empty form with the possibility to populate it with a saved draft   User testing should provide the usage frequency between the two and the one that's more likely to happen (my guess is that there would be a big difference between the two) should be implemented. So one of these:   Pre-populate question fields with saved draft on question form load, while also providing a button to clear the draft and start writing anew without the need to manually clear all the fields (which would be the optimal solution in case of a single field form) Question form should always load empty while also having a button that would pre-populate it with a saved draft.   I think this would be the best consensus related to saved question drafts and their usage. But as we've seen this issue has been swept under the rug for an indefinite time.