Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

> "Stephen" == Stephen Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Georg> The ability to use image formats that LyX does not know is Georg> really useful IMHO (of course this is only possible if our Stephen> default Georg> converter can handle them, but imagemagick Stephen> knows a lot of formats) SH>

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

Am Donnerstag, 19. Januar 2006 20:59 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes: > Ok, sounds good. Ok, it is in now. One bug less for 1.4.0! Georg

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | | > I am not sure... Is it correct to handle an unknown format as Ã¥ppm? | | Note that "ppm" is only used in GraphicsCacheItem.C in the latest patch. | This means that we'll convert all unknown formats to "ppm" for the onsc

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

Georg> The ability to use image formats that LyX does not know is Georg> really useful IMHO (of course this is only possible if our default Georg> converter can handle them, but imagemagick knows a lot of formats) SH> I hope this is on topic and perhaps is just a feature which has not SH> bee

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > I am not sure... Is it correct to handle an unknown format as Ã¥ppm? Note that "ppm" is only used in GraphicsCacheItem.C in the latest patch. This means that we'll convert all unknown formats to "ppm" for the onscreen preview. Note also that ppm is already the default

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lars> I am not sure... Is it correct to handle an unknown format as Lars> Ã¥ppm? shouldn't we rather fail-out and just say that we have no Lars> idea what to do with it? Georg should confirm, but I think the idea is to delegate to co

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | | Georg> And I don't like to touch getFormatFromContents because it | Georg> should be replaced anyway. I attach an updated patch, this is | Georg> the last one from me for this bug. If yo

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

> "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Georg> And I don't like to touch getFormatFromContents because it Georg> should be replaced anyway. I attach an updated patch, this is Georg> the last one from me for this bug. If you or somebody else want Georg> to fix this differently - fin

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 11:08:35AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 09:29:37AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > | > What about deciding of a relelase date, to put some pressure on ourselves? > | > | Something wrong wit

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

On Jan 14, 2006, at 5:28 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: I have some build issues to look at, and I am still waiting for confirmation that the tar disted with fink is good. (ie. able to read ustar archives) Yes -- it works, as does Apple's version. (See

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | Let's just write the release notes, update the Users Guide, and have it > | out. I think there are no fatal or data-loss bugs left. Anything else I > | am missing? > > I have some build issues to look at, and I am still waiting for > confirmation that the tar disted w

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Martin> Let's just write the release notes, update the Users Guide, Martin> and have it out. I think there are no fatal or data-loss bugs Martin> left. Anything else I am missing? There is the bug with reading math macros that needs hel

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 11:08:35AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 09:29:37AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: | > | > What about deciding of a relelase date, to put so

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 11:08:35AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 09:29:37AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > | > What about deciding of a relelase date, to put some pressure on ourselves? > | > | Something wrong wit

Re: Bugs status again

> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Andre> We should try to remove the data member and replace it by a Andre> function (or maybe two) in the long run at least. The thing that remembers what is the current font setting has to be a data member, although it could be moved to t

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 09:29:37AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: | > What about deciding of a relelase date, to put some pressure on ourselves? | | Something wrong with "Christmas"? I was thinking more "Feburuary". -- Lgb

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 08:53:55PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > Indeed. I attach an updated patch. --- src/graphics/GraphicsCacheItem.C2 Nov 2005 20:11:36 - 1.66 +++ src/graphics/GraphicsCacheItem.C10 Jan 2006 20:10:16 - @@ -335,8 +335,10 @@ string const findTargetFormat(strin

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 09:29:37AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > What about deciding of a relelase date, to put some pressure on ourselves? Something wrong with "Christmas"? Andre'

Re: Bugs status again

On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 03:14:04PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I disagree with martin that we should prevent font changes in > charstyles. So the current patch does not appeal to me at all. > > If I understand correctly, the problem is that LyXText::current_font > is either (1) the curren

Re: Bugs status again

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > "Bennett" == Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | | Bennett> On Jan 10, 2006, at 9:14 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: | >> To these bugs I would add two related ones: | >> | >> - it is not possible to build on OSX right now. This is

Re: Bugs status again

> "Bennett" == Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Bennett> On Jan 10, 2006, at 9:14 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> To these bugs I would add two related ones: >> >> - it is not possible to build on OSX right now. This is related to >> the changes Lars did to the libtool files, I thi

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > What about deciding of a relelase date, to put some pressure on ourselves? Good idea. I might have a look at bug 1934 over the weekend. If that succeeds I'd say we'll need one or two weeks for putting together release notes etc. Georg

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lars> Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > I do Lars> find the patch intrusive and would rather avoid it. Lars> | Lars> | But it does not become better with time, and we should fix Lars> this in 1.4.1 | if we don't do it in 1.4

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > I do find the patch intrusive and would rather avoid it. | | But it does not become better with time, and we should fix this in 1.4.1 | if we don't do it in 1.4.0. Sure. There will be a multitude of smalle (and some not so small changes in 1.4.1) Lets

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

Am Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2006 17:48 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: > I do not like this png hardcoding thing... Actually it is not needed at all, because findTargetFormat is not very clever (we discussed this already) > >> Wouldn't it be easier for now to just recognize XCF? > > Georg> I don't k

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

Am Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2006 01:16 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes: > Do we _really_ need this for 1.4.0 is then the question. IMO yes, but you decide. > I do find the patch intrusive and would rather avoid it. But it does not become better with time, and we should fix this in 1.4.1 if we don't do

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

> "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Georg> We have no format information for a file if Georg> getFormatFromContents() does not recognize the file format. Georg> This was no problem in the old days when formats and extenions Georg> were mixed, but we currently need a format even

Re: Bugs status again

On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 10:26 +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Martin> Still I think we differ in our views of what the charstyle > Martin> paradigm should be (I see it as a longer term complete > Martin> replacement of font attrib

Re: Bugs status again

> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Martin> Still I think we differ in our views of what the charstyle Martin> paradigm should be (I see it as a longer term complete Martin> replacement of font attributes from the user's POV). Ah well, Martin> some other time. >> No, we d

Re: Bugs status again

Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Think about it! _I_ will, but not for 1.4.0. (what you say makes sense to me) -- Lgb

Re: bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > The src/ChageLog entry is wrong BTW. | | Indeed. I attach an updated patch. IMHO this is not for 1.4.0 -- Lgb

Re: bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2006 15:14 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: | > > "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > Georg> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1973 x | > | > I am not sure I like the patch (it is intrusive). I have to

Re: Bugs status again

Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | I've done a bit more digging. It turns out Firefox on Mac defaults to | using Stuffit Expander to decompress .tar.gz files, and it's all | Stuffit's fault. Both versions of tar (1.15 and 1.14) succeed in | unpacking the file. | | We'll need to include a

bug 1973, was: Re: Bugs status again

Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2006 15:14 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: > > "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Georg> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1973 x > > I am not sure I like the patch (it is intrusive). I have to re-read > the thread to convince myself that there i

bug 2192, was: Re: Bugs status again

Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2006 15:14 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: > Georg> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2192 x > > Can you describe what you do? I cannot guess it from the patch. We have no format information for a file if getFormatFromContents() does not recognize the file format. Thi

Re: Bugs status again

On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 05:36:38PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Martin> If you can get this to work somehow, I would be happy for > Martin> 1.4.0 at least. > > Not sure I can :) > > Martin> Still I think we differ in our v

Re: Bugs status again

On Jan 10, 2006, at 10:46 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Jan 10, 2006, at 9:34 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | | > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes: | > | > | I'd like to have some more information about the tar binary on OSX. | >

Re: Bugs status again

> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Martin> If you can get this to work somehow, I would be happy for Martin> 1.4.0 at least. Not sure I can :) Martin> Still I think we differ in our views of what the charstyle Martin> paradigm should be (I see it as a longer term compl

Re: Bugs status again

> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Apple's version is: tar (GNU tar) 1.14 Lars> this might not have it And OSX people may not have the fink version. JMarc

Re: Bugs status again

On Tuesday 10 January 2006 15:25, Martin Vermeer wrote: > Ah well, some other time. Don't worry, we will get there. ;-) > - Martin -- José Abílio

Re: Bugs status again

Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Jan 10, 2006, at 9:34 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | | > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes: | > | > | I'd like to have some more information about the tar binary on OSX. | > | > More specifically what tar formats it actually supports. |

Re: Bugs status again

On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 15:14 +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ... > Georg> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2015 x > > Should have been applied long ago :) Hear hear. > Georg> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2019 x > >

Re: Bugs status again

On Jan 10, 2006, at 9:34 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes: | I'd like to have some more information about the tar binary on OSX. More specifically what tar formats it actually supports. tar (GNU tar) 1.15.1 That's the version installed via fink <

Re: Bugs status again

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes: | I'd like to have some more information about the tar binary on OSX. More specifically what tar formats it actually supports. -- Lgb

Re: Bugs status again

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | - it is not possible to build on OSX right now. This is related to the | changes Lars did to the libtool files, I think. Recent libtools | versions have code that reads -framework Foo from linker commands | and does something with them (?).

Re: Bugs status again

> "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Georg> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1934 not easy Not easy indeed :( Georg> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1973 x I am not sure I like the patch (it is intrusive). I have to re-read the thread to convince myself that th

Re: Bugs status again

On Tuesday 10 January 2006 09:09, Georg Baum wrote: > Jose' Matos wrote: > > On Tuesday 10 January 2006 08:05, Georg Baum wrote: > >> No. First I think the input is not a valid .lyx file, and second this > >> bug is present in 1.3.6, too (so no regression), and third if it really > >> should be a v

Re: Bugs status again

Jose' Matos wrote: > On Tuesday 10 January 2006 08:05, Georg Baum wrote: >> >> No. First I think the input is not a valid .lyx file, and second this bug >> is present in 1.3.6, too (so no regression), and third if it really >> should be a valid .lyx file it is a very uncommon one, so almost nobody

Re: Bugs status again

On Tuesday 10 January 2006 08:05, Georg Baum wrote: > > No. First I think the input is not a valid .lyx file, and second this bug > is present in 1.3.6, too (so no regression), and third if it really should > be a valid .lyx file it is a very uncommon one, so almost nobody will > notice whether thi

Re: Bugs status again

Am Montag, 9. Januar 2006 23:18 schrieb Uwe Stöhr: > Georg Baum schrieb: > > These are the bugs currently scheduled for 1.4.0: > > I just noticed that > > http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2199 > > seems to be a crash and perhaps this should also be fixed before 1.4. No. First I think the in

Re: Bugs status again

Georg Baum schrieb: These are the bugs currently scheduled for 1.4.0: I just noticed that http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2199 seems to be a crash and perhaps this should also be fixed before 1.4. regards Uwe

Bugs status again

These are the bugs currently scheduled for 1.4.0: bug patch comment http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1934 not easy http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1973 x http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2015 x http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cg