On 2023-11-21 18:19, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
On 11/21/23 06:17, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 21/11/2023 à 07:54, Daniel a écrit :
I see. But my point was that I don't think that it is specific to my
use case. The reason being that the comment feature is a default
feature found in many a
On 11/19/23 05:56, madmurphy wrote:
Hi!
First of all congratulations for the good work! Any chances the
hereapplies module* will be included with this release?
* https://github.com/madmurphy/hereapplies.sty/tree/main/lyx-module
Could you explain what this does?
Also, the module would need
I am so sorry, I tried it again and I can no longer reproduce either :-(
I will try to think of if there was anything I was doing differently earlier.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023, at 5:08 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 10:26:06AM -0500, Alexander Dunlap wrote:
> > I tried the same PDF i
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 10:26:06AM -0500, Alexander Dunlap wrote:
> I tried the same PDF in all three scenarios.
Ok, you challenged me to test this on both TL 2022 (debian based) and TL 2023
(installed locally for a standalone user).
Everything worked in both TL 2022 & 2023.
Could you give me ex
On 11/21/23 02:29, Isaac Oscar Gariano wrote:
The `todonotes` module provides insets for this... Personally though I
just defined my own inset...
Right! This is the "LyX way": Leverage the gazillion packages that
already exist, or else define your own.
Also I'd have some of the modules be load
On 11/21/23 06:17, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 21/11/2023 à 07:54, Daniel a écrit :
I see. But my point was that I don't think that it is specific to my
use case. The reason being that the comment feature is a default
feature found in many applications these days and that this indicates
a q
I tried the same PDF in all three scenarios.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023, at 10:06 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 08:48:40AM -0500, Alexander Dunlap wrote:
> > None of these tests give me any error messages. However, when I test it with
> > the absolute path, the output I get is differe
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 08:48:40AM -0500, Alexander Dunlap wrote:
> None of these tests give me any error messages. However, when I test it with
> the absolute path, the output I get is different. I ran it on a two-page PDF
> and with relative paths the resulting PDF is a single page with both page
On 2023-11-21 12:17, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 21/11/2023 à 07:54, Daniel a écrit :
I see. But my point was that I don't think that it is specific to my
use case. The reason being that the comment feature is a default
feature found in many applications these days and that this indicates
a
None of these tests give me any error messages. However, when I test it with
the absolute path, the output I get is different. I ran it on a two-page PDF
and with relative paths the resulting PDF is a single page with both pages side
by side, in a file called ORIGINALFILENAME-sidebyside.pdf. How
Le 21/11/2023 à 07:54, Daniel a écrit :
I see. But my point was that I don't think that it is specific to my use
case. The reason being that the comment feature is a default feature
found in many applications these days and that this indicates a quite
general usefulness of it.
As I wrote befo
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:34:48AM -0500, Alexander Dunlap wrote:
> Yes that is right, sorry for not reading carefully. :-)
Alas, the former fix breaks with path specifications.
The path searching mechanism of pdflatex (when -output-directory is used)
is willing to consider current directory for
12 matches
Mail list logo
