Richard Heck wrote:
> On 06/09/2014 07:27 AM, Georg Baum wrote:
>>
>> Therefore I vote for taking it out for 2.1.1 (but keep the higher number
>> of flush()). If you disagree then both bf782ee02a and f792e70d0a should
>> be backported of course.
>
> That sounds as if it may be necessary. What abo
On 06/09/2014 07:27 AM, Georg Baum wrote:
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
I tried with latest master (including your recent changes), and I still
get the warning.
* Open document
* Edit
* Save
=> No warning
* Edit more
* Save again
=> This time, the warning dialog pops up.
I see it as well with this
On 09.06.2014 13:27, Georg Baum wrote:
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
I tried with latest master (including your recent changes), and I still
get the warning.
* Open document
* Edit
* Save
=> No warning
* Edit more
* Save again
=> This time, the warning dialog pops up.
I see it as well with this r
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> I tried with latest master (including your recent changes), and I still
> get the warning.
> * Open document
> * Edit
> * Save
> => No warning
> * Edit more
> * Save again
> => This time, the warning dialog pops up.
I see it as well with this recipe, and fixed it at f7
Am Montag, 9. Juni 2014 um 11:47:51, schrieb Jürgen Spitzmüller
> 2014-06-09 11:26 GMT+02:00 Jürgen Spitzmüller:
>
> > 2014-06-09 11:21 GMT+02:00 Georg Baum:
> >
> > I saw the report, but I did not see it happening, with or without my patch.
> >> Scott and Jürgen, maybe you try to save on a networ
2014-06-09 11:26 GMT+02:00 Jürgen Spitzmüller:
> 2014-06-09 11:21 GMT+02:00 Georg Baum:
>
> I saw the report, but I did not see it happening, with or without my patch.
>> Scott and Jürgen, maybe you try to save on a network file system? Maybe it
>> has something to do with the checksumming.
>>
>
>
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> 2014-06-09 11:21 GMT+02:00 Georg Baum:
>
>> I saw the report, but I did not see it happening, with or without my
>> patch.
>> Scott and Jürgen, maybe you try to save on a network file system? Maybe it
>> has something to do with the check
2014-06-09 11:21 GMT+02:00 Georg Baum:
> I saw the report, but I did not see it happening, with or without my patch.
> Scott and Jürgen, maybe you try to save on a network file system? Maybe it
> has something to do with the checksumming.
>
No, no network FS, nothing specific here.
Jürgen
>
>
Richard Heck wrote:
> Nitpicking is exactly what we need here, for the reasons you give. I'd
> suggest you go ahead and commit this, and we can deal with the
> permissions issue next.
A slightly modified version which does not crash with circular symlinks is
in at bf782ee02ac. Note that circular
On 06/07/2014 04:42 PM, Georg Baum wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
On 06/02/2014 12:57 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 02/06/14 15:05, Richard Heck a écrit :
I propose to commit the attached. The effect is: (i) We always create a
backup file in the current directory, but in the backup directory
Georg Baum wrote:
> Some of my remarks may look like nitpicking. However, we are trying to
> work around a problem which does not occur very often (although it causes
> big damage if it occurs), and this is a central infrastructure part.
> Therefore we have to be extra careful not to destroy the m
Richard Heck wrote:
> On 06/02/2014 12:57 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Le 02/06/14 15:05, Richard Heck a écrit :
>>>
>>> I propose to commit the attached. The effect is: (i) We always create a
>>> backup file in the current directory, but in the backup directory if
>>> "Make Backups" is true
Le 03/06/14 17:46, Richard Heck a écrit :
Just to make LyX die from an horrible death and see what happens ;)
Oh, sorry, I see. I tried that, and a few other possibilities. In that
case, the original file is untouched. A partial file exists at
tmp-filename.lyx, as it should.
Excellent.
JMarc
On 06/03/2014 11:40 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 03/06/14 17:38, Richard Heck a écrit :
On 06/03/2014 11:03 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 03/06/14 16:44, Richard Heck a écrit :
What's wrong with what I proposed nitially, that is to create the
file
under some special name, and renam
Le 03/06/14 17:38, Richard Heck a écrit :
On 06/03/2014 11:03 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 03/06/14 16:44, Richard Heck a écrit :
What's wrong with what I proposed nitially, that is to create the file
under some special name, and rename it to the right name on success?
This means that the
On 06/03/2014 11:03 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 03/06/14 16:44, Richard Heck a écrit :
What's wrong with what I proposed nitially, that is to create the file
under some special name, and rename it to the right name on success?
This means that there is no file to copy.
Try this one, then
Le 03/06/14 16:44, Richard Heck a écrit :
What's wrong with what I proposed nitially, that is to create the file
under some special name, and rename it to the right name on success?
This means that there is no file to copy.
Try this one, then.
This looks good to me, but I did not try it out.
On 06/02/2014 12:57 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 02/06/14 15:05, Richard Heck a écrit :
I propose to commit the attached. The effect is: (i) We always create a
backup file in the current directory, but in the backup directory if
"Make Backups" is true; (ii) If we are unable to do so, we a
18 matches
Mail list logo
