Could not find LaTeX command for character....

2024-09-18 Thread Scott Kostyshak
If I do the following: cd lib/doc/ja && lyx -e lyx20x UserGuide.lyx && lyx UserGuide.20.lyx and then go to File > Export > LaTeX (pLatex) I get the following error: Could not find LaTeX command for character '§' (code point 0xa7) Is this worth fixing? Scott signature.asc Description: PG

Re: ctests failing on current master

2024-09-18 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 09:58:05AM GMT, Kornel Benko wrote: > Am Tue, 17 Sep 2024 21:53:07 +0200 > schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > > > > Should be working now. > > > > Very nice! Thanks! > > > > What do you think of the attached patch? If you agree with the approach, > > can you please double-chec

Re: ctests failing on current master

2024-09-18 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 09:51:36AM GMT, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Am Dienstag, dem 17.09.2024 um 21:59 +0200 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: > > Thanks for figuring out the issue. > > > > I have no idea. I guess the question is whether to switch to a > > different font or just leave it as is? I'm not s

Noticing runtime error in socktools.cpp

2024-09-18 Thread Kornel Benko
Lyx compiled with -fsanitize=undefined gives this at start: /usr2/src/lyx/lyx-git/src/support/socktools.cpp:121:56: runtime error: member access within null pointer of type 'struct sockaddr_un' #0 0x5570c33ba6c8 in lyx::support::socktools::listen(lyx::support::FileName const&, int) /usr2/src/lyx/

Re: ctests failing on current master

2024-09-18 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
Am Dienstag, dem 17.09.2024 um 21:59 +0200 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: > Thanks for figuring out the issue. > > I have no idea. I guess the question is whether to switch to a > different font or just leave it as is? I'm not sure if Koji would > have an idea. I tried Noto Serif CJK JP, but this even

Re: ctests failing on current master

2024-09-18 Thread Kornel Benko
Am Tue, 17 Sep 2024 21:53:07 +0200 schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > > Should be working now. > > Very nice! Thanks! > > What do you think of the attached patch? If you agree with the approach, > can you please double-check the code carefully? Specifically, I don't > know if my use of _err vs. _err