On 7/29/20 12:20 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote: > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 09:22:33PM -0400, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote: >>> when we export xHTML output, the exported images are in the form >>> "incrementnumber_path_to_the_image_imagefilename.png". >>> >>> I'm strugling with two issues: >>> >>> - the initial number is unstable - e.g. if you insert new fig in the >>> document >>> all subsequent ones suddenly get +1. after several exports you get bunch >>> of >>> obsolete files which you need to manually delete after each update. >>> >>> - the filenames tend to unnecesarily disclose directory structures (from >>> what I >>> see full path, not just relative used.) >>> >>> Is there some shortcoming if the filenames were hashes of the pictures >>> (or filename+hash so one can still makes sense of the files)? >>> It would help with both problems. >> I used mangled names just because it was relatively easy to do. We can >> change it to whatever we want, I suppose. > Attached is the patch that mangles graphic filenames by hashes (sha2 of > filename+abs path). > It omits counting part as I coud not figure out why we use counting at all. > > Is there case in which xHTML meaningfully exports two pictures with the same > path+name but different counter? (I checked the same file with two different > size, but that still exports as a single file).
I doubt it. As I said, I think I used mangled names because I was lazy (in a bad way) and did not think about this case. I'd push as is and see if anyone complains. Probably worth a note in the 2.4.0 release notes, though. Thibault, this might also be an issue with docbook. I do not know how much of the XHTML code you adapted in this case. Riki -- lyx-devel mailing list lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
