Le 17/04/12 20:53, Georg Baum a écrit :
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:OK, a new version (first the reversion, and then the actual patch). I do not see why we could not always use recordUndoInset, except that it may use more memory.Excellent, this works fine! Thank you very much for the help.
I'll commit that tomorrow. I also suspect this may also fix ticket #8128. JMarc
