Am 2015-08-25 um 00:47 schrieb David Kastrup :
>>> I tend to use an attachment with disposition "inline".
>> And how exactly do you do that, I’ve always been wondering?
>
> Gnus asks me how I want my file attachments when I insert them using
> C-c C-m f RET
In Apple Mail I get inline attachments
Am 24.08.2015 um 20:47 schrieb David Kastrup:
Simon Albrecht writes:
Am 24.08.2015 um 18:45 schrieb David Kastrup:
Simon Albrecht writes:
Am 20.08.2015 um 09:41 schrieb Phil Holmes:
For trivially small examples (like this is) I think most people find
it far easier to comment if you post t
Simon Albrecht writes:
> Am 24.08.2015 um 18:45 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Simon Albrecht writes:
>>
>>> Am 20.08.2015 um 09:41 schrieb Phil Holmes:
For trivially small examples (like this is) I think most people find
it far easier to comment if you post the code in line, rather than
>>
Am 24.08.2015 um 18:45 schrieb David Kastrup:
Simon Albrecht writes:
Am 20.08.2015 um 09:41 schrieb Phil Holmes:
For trivially small examples (like this is) I think most people find
it far easier to comment if you post the code in line, rather than
as an attachment. I certainly do.
I just r
Am 24.08.2015 um 18:27 schrieb David Kastrup:
Simon Albrecht writes:
Hello Anita,
sorry, but I can’t quite figure out what your problem is. You say ‘not
compiled’ in the subject, but actual message suggests that the output
is different from what you expected. Please give us the actual code
an
Hello,
Apologies if the message was not clear, I have indeed looked at the
suggested URL and was trying to be brief.
I installed the programme on a Mac yesterday.
Input: the scale example that comes with the installation.
Expectation: graphics of a scale starting at middle C.
Output: graphi
Simon Albrecht writes:
> Am 20.08.2015 um 09:41 schrieb Phil Holmes:
>> For trivially small examples (like this is) I think most people find
>> it far easier to comment if you post the code in line, rather than
>> as an attachment. I certainly do.
> I just recalled this remark of yours and wante
Simon Albrecht writes:
> Hello Anita,
>
> sorry, but I can’t quite figure out what your problem is. You say ‘not
> compiled’ in the subject, but actual message suggests that the output
> is different from what you expected. Please give us the actual code
> and output (as attachments) and describ
Simon Albrecht writes:
> Hello Anita,
>
> sorry, but I can’t quite figure out what your problem is. You say ‘not
> compiled’ in the subject, but actual message suggests that the output
> is different from what you expected. Please give us the actual code
> and output (as attachments) and describe
Am 20.08.2015 um 09:41 schrieb Phil Holmes:
For trivially small examples (like this is) I think most people find
it far easier to comment if you post the code in line, rather than as
an attachment. I certainly do.
I just recalled this remark of yours and wanted to reply to it.
I’ve taken a hab
Anita Milicic writes:
> Hello,
>
> Apologies if the message was not clear, I have indeed looked at the
> suggested URL and was trying to be brief.
Omitting any actual example is too brief.
> I installed the programme on a Mac yesterday.
Which version?
> Input: the scale example that comes wit
Hello Anita,
sorry, but I can’t quite figure out what your problem is. You say ‘not
compiled’ in the subject, but actual message suggests that the output is
different from what you expected. Please give us the actual code and
output (as attachments) and describe the exact problem.
I guess that
Anita Milicic writes:
> \version 2.18.2
>
> % graphical output is one octave down from middle C when compiled from the
> example file "A scale in Lilypond"
>
> % new files also compile an octave lower and typing " relative c' " results
> in one octave higher than middle C
Please see http://lilyp
\version 2.18.2
% graphical output is one octave down from middle C when compiled from the
example file "A scale in Lilypond"
% new files also compile an octave lower and typing " relative c' " results
in one octave higher than middle C
___
bug-li
Hello,
On 23/08/15 18:16, Thomas Morley wrote:
> 2015-08-23 18:58 GMT+02:00 James Lowe :
>> Hello,
>>
>> ***Important do please read***
>>
>> Google Tracker will be 'read-only' on the 25th August. At the moment,
>> as I understand it we are still 'transitioning' to a new tracker
>> system for issu
Hello,
On 23/08/15 19:04, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> James Lowe wrote Sunday, August 23, 2015 5:58 PM
>
>> Google Tracker will be 'read-only' on the 25th August. At the moment,
>> as I understand it we are still 'transitioning' to a new tracker
>> system for issues but Rietveld is still working as
16 matches
Mail list logo
