Roberto answered specifically for the situation of the OP. I want to try to give a more general answer:
(For impatient readers: solution in lower part of this answer.)
First let’s create a small testfile – testfile.tex
\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}
content
\end{document}
As the OP noted, does
texify --pdf --texinfo="\pagestyle{empty}" testfile.tex
:
not produce any error, but the page number is still visible (I prefer \pagestyle…
). Since Texify with the option --pdf
calls internally PDFLaTeX, let’s see, what does happen with
pdflatex testfile.tex "\pagestyle{empty}"
The (not so) surprising answer is: Same result – no error, but also no success. But for (PDF(La))TeX another approach is well known:
pdflatex "\pagestyle{empty}\input{testfile.tex}"
Though, oops, no change. But this one works:
pdflatex "\AtBeginDocument{\pagestyle{empty}}\input{testfile.tex}"
(*)
If we try now to adapt this to Texify, we will with
texify --pdf --texinfo="\AtBeginDocument{\pagestyle{empty}}\input{testfile.tex}"
get an error texify: Missing file argument.
So I tried
texify --pdf --texinfo="\AtBeginDocument{\pagestyle{empty}}\input{testfile.tex}" testfile.tex
(yes, the file is invoked twice). Surprisingly no error, but still no success. But there’s another possible parameter (cf. http://docs.miktex.org/manual/texify.html) --tex-option
, and with this replacing --texinfo
I found …
The solution
If a simple PDFLaTeX call as in (*) really is not enough and one wants to call Texify instead, this command prompt call works:
texify --pdf --tex-option="\AtBeginDocument{\pagestyle{empty}}\input{testfile.tex}" testfile.tex
Once again: Yes, the file is intentionally invoked twice here.
Because this is rather long, one could put this in a batch file and later call this instead.
test.bat
:
@echo off
texify --pdf --tex-option="\AtBeginDocument{\pagestyle{empty}}\input{%1}" %1
Now in command prompt one has to execute:
test.bat testfile.tex
At least it worked fine here in this way.
BTW: Thanks to Werner, because he brought up \AtBeginDocument…
in his comment to the duplicate question.