On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 03:09:13PM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> The security problems of ghostscript which caused the policy restrictions
> were
> fixed with the release of ghostscript 9.25 (released 2018-09-13).
> I quickly looked at ubuntu packages and 18.04 already ships 9.25, so
> it would be
On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 02:32:19PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 02:14:58PM -0500, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
> > On 11/5/18 2:32 PM, Jeff Defoe wrote:
> > > I realized I was using the Lyx from the Ubuntu repository. When I
> > > removed it, added the PPA, and installed LyX from
On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 02:14:58PM -0500, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
> On 11/5/18 2:32 PM, Jeff Defoe wrote:
> > I realized I was using the Lyx from the Ubuntu repository. When I
> > removed it, added the PPA, and installed LyX from that -- it now seems
> > to work.
> >
> > I do, however, have an odd pr
On 11/5/18 2:32 PM, Jeff Defoe wrote:
I realized I was using the Lyx from the Ubuntu repository. When I
removed it, added the PPA, and installed LyX from that -- it now seems
to work.
I do, however, have an odd problem where graphics often don't display
in LyX, giving errors such as "error lo
I realized I was using the Lyx from the Ubuntu repository. When I removed
it, added the PPA, and installed LyX from that -- it now seems to work.
I do, however, have an odd problem where graphics often don't display in
LyX, giving errors such as "error loading file into memory" or "error
convertin
On 11/2/18, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> Unfortunately, without debug symbols, the backtrace is unreadable. I
> don't know if there is an Ubuntu package that would allow you to install
> them.
If the OP is using the LyX PPA, try to install the lyx-dbg package,
which should give the debugging sy
Can you describe better what triggers this bug?
Unfortunately, without debug symbols, the backtrace is unreadable. I
don't know if there is an Ubuntu package that would allow you to install
them. But you could also try compiling from source with --enable-debug.
Riki
On 11/1/18 9:20 PM, Jeff De
( 1) lyx: lyx() [0x8de95d]
( 2) lyx: lyx() [0x8b]
( 3) lyx: lyx() [0x5a13dc]
( 4) /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6:
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x3ef20) [0x7f83f8afaf20]
( 5) lyx: lyx() [0x902e5d]
( 6) lyx: lyx() [0x90164c]
( 7) lyx: lyx() [0x90b451]
( 8) lyx: lyx() [0x6e9d1b]
( 9)
Hello again,
Closing all open buffers and reopening a new document has corrected this
issue, but if I can help you to find the source of this bug, I would be
happy to do it.
I use LyX under OSX 10.13.6
Le sam. 27 oct. 2018 à 17:14, Murat Yildizoglu <
murat.yildizo...@u-bordeaux.fr> a écrit :
> He
On 27/10/2018 17:14, Murat Yildizoglu wrote:
Hello,
I am puzzled by a problem I get in Lyx now.
I have just closed the outline panel and Lyx screen became very weird
(see the screenshot), and I cannot find how I can reset it to its normal
appearance with the documents bar on the top of the edit
Stephan
that makes sense.
In my perl script I use open anyway, and I will look at a function for command
line use
Thank you again.
el
Sent from Dr Lisse’s iPad mini 4
On 11 Oct 2018, 07:04 +0200, Stephan Witt , wrote:
> Am 10.10.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Dr Eberhard W Lisse :
> >
> > Stephan,
> >
Am 10.10.2018 um 23:45 schrieb Dr Eberhard W Lisse :
>
> Stephan,
>
> thank you.
>
> I use lyx from the command line a lot and have symlinked
> /Applications/LyX.app/Contents/MacOS/lyx to /usr/local/bin. Using the
> symlink it crashes, using the full path it works.
I see.
> Is it reproducible
Stephan,
thank you.
I use lyx from the command line a lot and have symlinked
/Applications/LyX.app/Contents/MacOS/lyx to /usr/local/bin. Using the
symlink it crashes, using the full path it works.
Is it reproducible with the symlink? And if so would that be considered
a bug?
Just for interes
Am 10.10.2018 um 13:24 schrieb Dr Eberhard Lisse :
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to debug a lyxserver issue but when running
>
> lyx -dbg lyxserver
>
> I get
>
> Setting debug level to lyxserver
> Debugging `lyxserver' (External control interface)
> This application failed to
> On 7 Oct 2018, at 14:00, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
> Le 07/10/2018 à 14:46, Paola Manzini a écrit :
>> Hi All,
>> using LyX 2.3.1 on a MacBook Pro, Mac OS version 10.14 Mojave: bold fonts do
>> not show on screen when editing. The documents does compile co
Le 07/10/2018 à 14:46, Paola Manzini a écrit :
Hi All,
using LyX 2.3.1 on a MacBook Pro, Mac OS version 10.14 Mojave: bold fonts do
not show on screen when editing. The documents does compile correctly. I
haven’t seen this bug reported, so here I go. I had the same problem on Mac OS
High
Hi All,
using LyX 2.3.1 on a MacBook Pro, Mac OS version 10.14 Mojave: bold fonts do
not show on screen when editing. The documents does compile correctly. I
haven’t seen this bug reported, so here I go. I had the same problem on Mac OS
High Sierra.
Thanks,
Paola
Am Montag, den 01.10.2018, 11:23 -0400 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck:
> I think we decided not to bother with tarballs for this release, as
> (a)
> it is a very minor update, really, (b) people who want to build it
> themselves can check out 2.3.1-1, and (c) most people who would be
&
Public release of LyX version 2.3.1-1
=
We are proud to announce the release of LyX 2.3.1-1. This is an update
to the original release of LyX 2.3.1.
There are three main changes, affecting only Windows and OSX. Linux
users can ignore this release.
For
On 10/1/18 4:28 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
> Am 30.09.2018 um 19:44 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck :
>> I've pushed it to the main repo.
> Ok, thank you! It works for me.
>
> I’ve tested it with the following steps:
> 1. check out 2.3.1-1
> 2. build the dist target
> 3.
Am 30.09.2018 um 19:44 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck :
>
> I've pushed it to the main repo.
Ok, thank you! It works for me.
I’ve tested it with the following steps:
1. check out 2.3.1-1
2. build the dist target
3. use the LyX-2.3-2.3.1-1.tar.bz2 to build the package
4. verify t
. Please test.
Stefan: I am pretty sure this will be the final version, but I don't
want to tag it until I'm sure. Still, if you want to go ahead and build
a new package, then you can check out rgheck/2.3.1-1, which is what I
will push as a new tag once I am sure. (It'll be exactly the
this will be the final version, but I don't
want to tag it until I'm sure. Still, if you want to go ahead and build
a new package, then you can check out rgheck/2.3.1-1, which is what I
will push as a new tag once I am sure. (It'll be exactly the same code,
but of course in the main
o tag it until I'm sure. Still, if you want to go ahead and build
a new package, then you can check out rgheck/2.3.1-1, which is what I
will push as a new tag once I am sure. (It'll be exactly the same code,
but of course in the main repo.) The only change that will affect you is
the one
On 9/29/18 7:50 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
> Am 29.09.2018 um 11:09 schrieb Jürgen Spitzmüller :
>> Am Freitag, den 28.09.2018, 20:51 -0400 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck:
I think for the sake of clarity we should do that, yes.
>>> OK. I personally do not know how to do this, so I will wait
>>
Am 29.09.2018 um 11:09 schrieb Jürgen Spitzmüller :
>
> Am Freitag, den 28.09.2018, 20:51 -0400 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck:
>>> I think for the sake of clarity we should do that, yes.
>>
>> OK. I personally do not know how to do this, so I will wait
>
> update version and date in configur
Am Freitag, den 28.09.2018, 20:51 -0400 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck:
> > I think for the sake of clarity we should do that, yes.
>
> OK. I personally do not know how to do this, so I will wait
update version and date in configure.ac
(this should have been done also for the windows updates,
On 28/09/2018 16:13, Daniel wrote:
Hi,
I am pretty sure that 2) is a bug. Maybe there is a reason for 1) but
then the installer should tell the user to uninstall the old version
first not only under the conditions mentioned in the initial dialog (see
attached screen capture).
"reinstall" in
t not touch the latter (if it already exists).
Yes, I see LyX2.3.exe is the binary in version 2.3.1. In 2.2.3 and
earlier it is just lyx.exe. This will be relevant when double-clicking
on a *.lyx file to open it (which I don't do as a rule, generally
opening LyX then finding the file from wit
e to look further at this.
> I would expect a minor version upgrade to overwrite the LyX 2.3
> directory, but not overwrite the LyX2.3 directory. I hadn't noticed
> before but I see that the binary is LyX2.3.exe (camel-cased &
> numbered) for version 2.3.1, but in 2.2.3 (and earlier versions, if I
> remember correctly) it is just lyx.exe.
It will be LyX.exe in future releases. But of course Windows is
case-insensitive.
Riki
the binary is LyX2.3.exe (camel-cased & numbered) for version
2.3.1, but in 2.2.3 (and earlier versions, if I remember correctly) it
is just lyx.exe.
Andrew
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On 09/28/2018 12:04 PM, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> On 9/28/18 10:31 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> Am Freitag, den 28.09.2018, 16:13 +0200 schrieb Daniel:
>>> Maybe there is a reason for 1) but
>>> then the installer should tell the user to uninstall the old version
>>> first not only under
make that change. (The installer code
> connects several such things that ought to be separated.) We do want to
> have "versioned" user directories on Windows. I'll fix that over the
> weekend.
Actually actually, I'm wrong about that. This setting depends upon
LYX_PROGRAM_PRE
On 09/28/2018 12:36 PM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 28.09.2018, 12:00 -0400 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck:
>>> Don’t we need a new version tag to get the 2.3.1.1 in the About
>>> LyX?
>>> I should have ask earlier, I know - sorry.
>>
>> I'm kind of ignorant of that sort of thing. An
Am Freitag, den 28.09.2018, 12:00 -0400 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck:
> > Don’t we need a new version tag to get the 2.3.1.1 in the About
> > LyX?
> > I should have ask earlier, I know - sorry.
>
>
> I'm kind of ignorant of that sort of thing. Anyone?
I think for the sake of clarity we should
On 9/28/18 10:31 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 28.09.2018, 16:13 +0200 schrieb Daniel:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just checked the new installer. The crashing on closing the PDF
>> reader
>> seems fixed. However,
>>
>> 1) if one installs it over the existing version, it will create a
>> seco
On 9/28/18 1:12 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
> Am 27.09.2018 um 19:56 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck :
>> On 09/23/2018 02:57 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>>> Am Samstag, den 22.09.2018, 20:42 +0200 schrieb Stephan Witt:
>> What can be done with it? The error is serious and makes the
>> tex2lyx
Am Freitag, den 28.09.2018, 16:13 +0200 schrieb Daniel:
> Hi,
>
> I just checked the new installer. The crashing on closing the PDF
> reader
> seems fixed. However,
>
> 1) if one installs it over the existing version, it will create a
> second
> LyX version rather than replace the current one.
Hi,
I just checked the new installer. The crashing on closing the PDF reader
seems fixed. However,
1) if one installs it over the existing version, it will create a second
LyX version rather than replace the current one. There will be a LyX.exe
as well as a LyX2.3.exe.
And
2) the new vers
Am 27.09.2018 um 19:56 schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck :
>
> On 09/23/2018 02:57 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> Am Samstag, den 22.09.2018, 20:42 +0200 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> What can be done with it? The error is serious and makes the
> tex2lyx in the original package useless. I propose
On 09/23/2018 02:57 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 22.09.2018, 20:42 +0200 schrieb Stephan Witt:
What can be done with it? The error is serious and makes the
tex2lyx in the original package useless. I propose to replace the
wrong package with the new one. But is this
Am Samstag, den 22.09.2018, 20:42 +0200 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> > > What can be done with it? The error is serious and makes the
> > > tex2lyx in the original package useless. I propose to replace the
> > > wrong package with the new one. But is this an option? There is
> > > no visible difference
g/msg206434.html
>>
>> We never had this problem and I wasn’t aware of the additional linker
>> command line
>> parameter -headerpad_max_install_names to avoid that error.
>>
>> I’ve used the lyx-2.3.1-2 tar archive again to build the binaries with it.
>
On 09/17/2018 08:27 AM, José Abílio Matos wrote:
> On Monday, 17 September 2018 04.56.46 WEST Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>> Since I'm the one who caused the bug, I'm not sure how much praise I get
>> for reverting the fix. But thanks anyway!
> You are being modest. :-)
> The whole process has bee
lars. There
are of course some fees built into that, so it will probably be slightly
more.
Riki
On Sunday, September 16, 2018 11:40:46 AM PDT Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>> Public release of LyX version 2.3.1
>> ===
>>
>> We are proud t
On 16/09/2018 17:40, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
Public release of LyX version 2.3.1
===
We are proud to announce the release of LyX 2.3.1. This is the first
maintenance release in the 2.3.x series.
Thanks a lot for all the developer's work! I am a very
On Monday, 17 September 2018 04.56.46 WEST Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> Since I'm the one who caused the bug, I'm not sure how much praise I get
> for reverting the fix. But thanks anyway!
You are being modest. :-)
The whole process has been very smooth and thus seemingly it does not require
to
. This was all due to the problems with
> #9158, which required fixes after the original lyx-2.3.1.tar.xz was
> released.
>
> Riki
What most projects do is to rewrite (sometimes silently) the tarballs. :-)
This has happened to me several times, and usually the rpm spec file has a
chan
On 09/16/2018 05:19 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 09:20:01PM +0100, José Abílio Matos wrote:
>> On Sunday, 16 September 2018 21.15.02 WEST Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>>> I have to thank you for all the hard work you put in actually get this
>>> release out.
>>>
>>> JMarc
>>
On 09/16/2018 04:52 PM, José Abílio Matos wrote:
> On Sunday, 16 September 2018 21.33.29 WEST José Abílio Matos wrote:
>> In order to build to Fedora I tried to download the xz file and I get:
>>
>> "The requested URL /pub/lyx/stable/2.3.x/lyx-2.3.1.tar.xz was n
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 09:20:01PM +0100, José Abílio Matos wrote:
> On Sunday, 16 September 2018 21.15.02 WEST Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > I have to thank you for all the hard work you put in actually get this
> > release out.
> >
> > JMarc
>
> +100 !
+1000 !! :) :) [1]
Really, thank you R
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 21.33.29 WEST José Abílio Matos wrote:
> In order to build to Fedora I tried to download the xz file and I get:
>
> "The requested URL /pub/lyx/stable/2.3.x/lyx-2.3.1.tar.xz was not found on
> this server."
>
> That happens because of
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 21.15.02 WEST Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> I have to thank you for all the hard work you put in actually get this
> release out.
>
> JMarc
+100 !
--
José Abílio
Le 16/09/2018 à 17:40, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit :
Public release of LyX version 2.3.1
===
We are proud to announce the release of LyX 2.3.1. This is the first
maintenance release in the 2.3.x series.
I have to thank you for all the hard work you put in
Public release of LyX version 2.3.1
===
We are proud to announce the release of LyX 2.3.1. This is the first
maintenance release in the 2.3.x series.
You can download LyX 2.3.1 from http://www.lyx.org/Download/.
LyX is a document processor that encourages an
Hi, all,
I somehow failed to upload the tarballs when I uploaded the binaries.
(Scatter-brained with the start of the semester.) So I have to do that
now. I'll therefore do the release over the weekend.
Riki
On 08/09/2018 21:44, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
On 09/08/2018 02:29 PM, Daniel wrote:
On 08/09/2018 20:13, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
On 09/08/2018 03:20 AM, Daniel wrote:
On 06/09/2018 19:37, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
Here:
http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
Please let
On Saturday, 8 September 2018 19.25.41 WEST Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> New (and seemingly final) tarballs for 2.3.1 are now on the ftp site here:
>
> http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
>
> Sorry to those who already built binaries: They'll need to be re-done.
On 09/08/2018 02:29 PM, Daniel wrote:
> On 08/09/2018 20:13, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>> On 09/08/2018 03:20 AM, Daniel wrote:
>>> On 06/09/2018 19:37, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
Here:
http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
Please let us know if this fixes th
On 08/09/2018 20:13, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
On 09/08/2018 03:20 AM, Daniel wrote:
On 06/09/2018 19:37, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
Here:
http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
Please let us know if this fixes the slowness bug from before. If so,
we'll proceed to release.
Riki
New (and seemingly final) tarballs for 2.3.1 are now on the ftp site here:
http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
Sorry to those who already built binaries: They'll need to be re-done.
This is all due to the problem with slowness reported in #9158.
Riki
On 09/08/2018 03:20 AM, Daniel wrote:
> On 06/09/2018 19:37, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>> Here:
>>
>> http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
>>
>> Please let us know if this fixes the slowness bug from before. If so,
>> we'll proceed to release.
>>
>> Riki
>
> I didn't notice any slownes
On 06/09/2018 19:37, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
Here:
http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
Please let us know if this fixes the slowness bug from before. If so,
we'll proceed to release.
Riki
I didn't notice any slowness as compared to 2.3.0.
Daniel
On 7/09/2018 5:37 a.m., Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
Here:
http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
Please let us know if this fixes the slowness bug from before. If so,
we'll proceed to release.
Riki
I've installed this version and it solves the slowness problem with my
test document
Here:
http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/
Please let us know if this fixes the slowness bug from before. If so,
we'll proceed to release.
Riki
Hi, all,
First, sorry to be slow dealing with the new tarballs, etc. I'm about to
upload a new Windows installer for testing, and if that's OK then I'll
upload new tarballs, etc, so we can build new binaries, etc.
While we're waiting, it seems to me that it is now time to kill off the
bundle inst
It seems that the problem was due to an unintentional change in the name
of the folder. It had nothing to do with LyX. Apologies and thanks for
your replies! Micha
On 05.09.2018 14:25, Kornel Benko wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 5. September 2018 14:04:50 CEST schrieb Micha H. Werner
:
currently, com
Le 05/09/2018 à 14:25, Kornel Benko a écrit :
Am Mittwoch, 5. September 2018 14:04:50 CEST schrieb Micha H. Werner
:
currently, compilation of LyX2.3.1-1 fails on Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS.
This is the complete output of ./configure:
root@dell:/local/lyx# ./configure
Why do you do this as root?
An
Am Mittwoch, 5. September 2018 14:04:50 CEST schrieb Micha H. Werner
:
> currently, compilation of LyX2.3.1-1 fails on Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS.
>
> This is the complete output of ./configure:
>
> root@dell:/local/lyx# ./configure
Why do you do this as root?
And why in the source dir?
> configuring
currently, compilation of LyX2.3.1-1 fails on Ubuntu 18.04.1 LTS.
This is the complete output of ./configure:
root@dell:/local/lyx# ./configure
configuring LyX version 2.3.0
checking for build type... release
checking for version suffix...
checking whether Qt5 is requested... no
checking build s
imagemagick no
> matter
> the consequences. I don't need to stress on this list what it means
> for
> LyX -- just from todays update of my distro I'm not capable to view
> most
> of my documents by default...
>
> Unfortuntaly there is very little we can dire
On 09/02/2018 10:50 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 12:59:22PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>
>> In longer-term -- if this ban continues -- we might try to ask Qt to do the
>> conversions instead of imagemagick, but that's is definitely not for 2.3.1.
On Sun, Sep 02, 2018 at 12:59:22PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Unfortuntaly there is very little we can directly for 2.3.1.
> We should at least signalize in announcement for distro maintainers that this
> *is*
> issue and perhaps add some hint how to allow users to locally enable
ans for
LyX -- just from todays update of my distro I'm not capable to view most
of my documents by default...
Unfortuntaly there is very little we can directly for 2.3.1.
We should at least signalize in announcement for distro maintainers that this
*is*
issue and perhaps add some hint how t
On Monday, 27 August 2018 19.41.26 WEST Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> Are available for testing at http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/.
> I suppose we should wait to prepare binaries until we have some feedback.
>
> Riki
Compiled successfully on Fedora 27 to 30 (rawhide), as well as EL7, f
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 05:20:38PM +0200, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote:
> Le 27/08/2018 à 20:41, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit :
> > Are available for testing at http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/.
> > I suppose we should wait to prepare binaries until we have some feedback.
Compiles and work
Packaging: posix
LyX binary dir: /usr/local/bin
LyX files dir: /usr/local/share/lyx-2.3.1
compilation runs flawlessly,
With TL18, Advanced, Customization and EmbeddeOnjects pdfcompile all right.
UserGuide compilation is successful, with two warnings from the
Sorry, I meant tarballs
On 08/27/2018 02:41 PM, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> Are available for testing at http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/.
> I suppose we should wait to prepare binaries until we have some feedback.
>
> Riki
>
>
Are available for testing at http://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/devel/lyx-2.3/.
I suppose we should wait to prepare binaries until we have some feedback.
Riki
Szőke Sándor wrote:
> Dear Pavel,
>
> I have checked the strings, and found some deviations. I have corrected
> them, but have not too much chance to check them in action now.
>
> Please see the strings in raw, also the updated .po file is attached.
>
> "Property"- Tulajdonság
> "Solution"- Megold
Am Sonntag, 19. August 2018 15:46:30 CEST schrieb Szőke Sándor
:
> Something else:
> Just before this check I found a strange bug in LyX, I was checked and
> tried to update the hu version of splash.lyx (it is attached).
> After openeing the file and clicking in the 3rd item in the ordered
> lis
I've asked our translators to do their work for 2.3.1, so no
string-changing commits to 2.3.x until the release.
Riki
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 10:17:47AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 30 juillet 2018 04:21:14 GMT+02:00, Richard Kimberly Heck
> a écrit :
> >Anyone have issues that need resolving before I freeze strings?
> >Thinking
> >to do that on Tuesday...
> >
> >Riki
>
> Not me.
Nothing from me
Sc
Le 30 juillet 2018 04:21:14 GMT+02:00, Richard Kimberly Heck
a écrit :
>Anyone have issues that need resolving before I freeze strings?
>Thinking
>to do that on Tuesday...
>
>Riki
Not me.
JMarc
Anyone have issues that need resolving before I freeze strings? Thinking
to do that on Tuesday...
Riki
Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> >> Any disagreement?
> > That sounds reasonable, but I don't recall many reports from users who
> > have installed the 2.2.3 bundle and reported problems. I guess the
> > problem comes if they try to update MiKTeX after installing the 2.2.3
> > bundle?
>
> The answer
On 05/15/2018 01:14 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 09:30:09AM +, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>> Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>>> I am working on this. I've managed to compile for Windows using mingw on
>>> Linux (amazingly easy, actually) but have not dealt with the packaging
>>> i
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 09:30:09AM +, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> > I am working on this. I've managed to compile for Windows using mingw on
> > Linux (amazingly easy, actually) but have not dealt with the packaging
> > issues yet. Fortunately, someone who reported a bug
Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> I am working on this. I've managed to compile for Windows using mingw on
> Linux (amazingly easy, actually) but have not dealt with the packaging
> issues yet. Fortunately, someone who reported a bug to us seems as if
> they may have done so and is giving me some help
>>>> 2018-05-06 19:50 GMT+02:00 Richard Kimberly Heck:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm intending to close stable to string changes shortly, so we can move
>>>>>> toward 2.3.1. We have a LOT of bug fixes already. Anything that needs
>>>>
t;>
>>>>> I'm intending to close stable to string changes shortly, so we can move
>>>>> toward 2.3.1. We have a LOT of bug fixes already. Anything that needs
>>>>> doing before we notify the translators?
>>>>>
>>>> Any plan
changes shortly, so we can move
> >>> toward 2.3.1. We have a LOT of bug fixes already. Anything that needs
> >>> doing before we notify the translators?
> >>>
> >> Any plans how to proceed with the Windows binaries?
> > If Uwe definitively decided
Le 09/05/2018 à 03:45, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit :
6df8c42e59f7d 7bcb78a77875ec 90cfe4ec3b4ff2
Those would be fine with me.
Thanks, they are in now.
JMarc
On 05/09/2018 11:18 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> 2018-05-06 19:50 GMT+02:00 Richard Kimberly Heck:
>>
>>> I'm intending to close stable to string changes shortly, so we can move
>>> toward 2.3.1. We have a LOT of bug fixes already. A
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> 2018-05-06 19:50 GMT+02:00 Richard Kimberly Heck:
>
> > I'm intending to close stable to string changes shortly, so we can move
> > toward 2.3.1. We have a LOT of bug fixes already. Anything that needs
> > doing before we notify the transl
2018-05-06 19:50 GMT+02:00 Richard Kimberly Heck:
> I'm intending to close stable to string changes shortly, so we can move
> toward 2.3.1. We have a LOT of bug fixes already. Anything that needs
> doing before we notify the translators?
>
Any plans how to proceed with the
Le 09/05/2018 à 09:36, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
Those would be fine with me.
JMarc? P
Yes, I am here :) I am busy today, but may manage to do that on Thursday
or Friday.
JMarc
Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> On 05/08/2018 06:47 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> >> On 05/08/2018 05:30 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> >>> Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> >>>> I'm intending to close stable to string changes sh
On 05/08/2018 06:47 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>> On 05/08/2018 05:30 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>>> Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>>>> I'm intending to close stable to string changes shortly, so we can move
>>>> toward 2.3.1. We
Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> On 05/08/2018 05:30 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> >> I'm intending to close stable to string changes shortly, so we can move
> >> toward 2.3.1. We have a LOT of bug fixes already. Anything that needs
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
