> Try this patch instead.
Does not work.
Bo
Bo Peng wrote:
On 8/16/07, Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't understand why you want to revert it. It will hurt
someone sooner or later.
Because your fix might not be necessary at all. Maybe some signal
sender/receiver will be destroyed at the same time, maybe a signal
will
On 8/16/07, Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't understand why you want to revert it. It will hurt
> someone sooner or later.
Because your fix might not be necessary at all. Maybe some signal
sender/receiver will be destroyed at the same time, maybe a signal
will never be sent
Bo Peng wrote:
I will also
revert Abdel's patch when I apply it to the trunk. After all, we
should not fix a bug that does not exist (yet).
I don't really care if you revert it but your patch is doing exactly the
same as my patch: you disconnect the signal before the item is
destroyed. I don'
Dear all,
Using a gcc3 compiled lyx, when we remove the underlying figure of a
graphic inset that is copied and pasted, lyx crashes.
This is because 'cached_item_.connect()' is not properly disconnected
when the cached_item_ is reset. This may not be related to the
signals/desctructor problem we
