Jürgen Spitzmüller writes:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> > I think this patch should now also go to branch and trunk.
>>
>> Done.
>
> Shall we close the bug report, then? After all, 1.6.4.2 is released.
I'll do it.
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > I think this patch should now also go to branch and trunk.
>
> Done.
Shall we close the bug report, then? After all, 1.6.4.2 is released.
Jürgen
Jürgen Spitzmüller writes:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> OK, here is a new patch that applies to branch (replaces nofork2).
>
> I think this patch should now also go to branch and trunk.
Done.
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> OK, here is a new patch that applies to branch (replaces nofork2).
I think this patch should now also go to branch and trunk.
Jürgen
BH wrote:
> I've placed the universal binary here:
>
> http://edisk.fandm.edu/bennett.helm/lyx/LyX-1.6.4.2-Mac-Universal.dmg
Thanks. I'm just uploading.
Jürgen
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 3:36 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> I uploaded a new version to
>> ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/lyx-1.6.4.2.tar.gz
>> ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/lyx-1.6.4.2.tar.bz2
>>
>
> This should read
> ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/l
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> I uploaded a new version to
> ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/lyx-1.6.4.2.tar.gz
> ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/lyx-1.6.4.2.tar.bz2
>
This should read
ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/stable/lyx-1.6.4.2.tar.gz
ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/stable/ly
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Time for another attempt at 1.6.4.2?
>
> Yes, I think so (or 1.6.4.2.1 :)
I uploaded a new version to
ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/lyx-1.6.4.2.tar.gz
ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/lyx-1.6.4.2.tar.bz2
Since the former trial was never announced
Jürgen Spitzmüller writes:
>> The part in ForkedCalls should be applied anyway I think.
>>
>> The autosave part is in Buffer.cpp.
>
> Time for another attempt at 1.6.4.2?
Yes, I think so (or 1.6.4.2.1 :)
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> OK, here is a new patch that applies to branch (replaces nofork2).
>
> Could some kind mac users (and others) try it out? I am running out of
> time.
>
> The part in ForkedCalls should be applied anyway I think.
>
> The autosave part is in Buffer.cpp.
Time for an
Dear Jean-Marc and Bennett,
On 2009-11-11 20:25, "BH" wrote:
> I've posted a binary here:
>
> http://edisk.fandm.edu/bennett.helm/lyx/LyX-Snow-Leopard-Test2.app.zip
Many thanks for the patch and binary, respectively. I have tried Bennett's
binary without trouble on Leopard (edit, save, autosav
On 11 nov 2009, at 21.25, BH wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Anders Ekberg wrote:
>
>> Bennett,
>>
>> Something is very wrong with my system (compiling crashes and sometimes
>> locks the entire OS, which is why I haven't mitigated the patch for
>> INSTALL.MacOSX yet). So I can't com
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Anders Ekberg wrote:
> Bennett,
>
> Something is very wrong with my system (compiling crashes and sometimes locks
> the entire OS, which is why I haven't mitigated the patch for INSTALL.MacOSX
> yet). So I can't compile it. But if you can mail me a binary I can
On 11 nov 2009, at 20.29, BH wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 2:23 PM, BH wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
>> wrote:
Sure it is. But I do not have much time to spend in front of a mac :(
>>>
>>> OK, here is a new patch that applies to branch (replaces nofork
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 2:23 PM, BH wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> wrote:
>>> Sure it is. But I do not have much time to spend in front of a mac :(
>>
>> OK, here is a new patch that applies to branch (replaces nofork2).
>>
>> Could some kind mac users (and othe
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
>> Sure it is. But I do not have much time to spend in front of a mac :(
>
> OK, here is a new patch that applies to branch (replaces nofork2).
>
> Could some kind mac users (and others) try it out? I am running out of time.
>
> The par
Sure it is. But I do not have much time to spend in front of a mac :(
OK, here is a new patch that applies to branch (replaces nofork2).
Could some kind mac users (and others) try it out? I am running out of
time.
The part in ForkedCalls should be applied anyway I think.
The autosave part
Gregory Jefferis writes:
> Just to confirm from man kill(2) at:
>
> http://developer.apple.com/Mac/library/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPag
> es/man2/kill.2.html#//apple_ref/doc/man/2/kill
Thanks!
> So the choice of -1 as the return value when ForkedProcess::fork()
> can't fork turned out t
On 2009-11-10 15:35, "Jean-Marc Lasgouttes" wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
>> This is pretty bad. But note that it is considered as pretty rude from a
>> modern OS to just die because of an application it does not like. Is it
>> fix with the recent 10.6.2 OS X update?
>
> I suspect that
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
>> This is pretty bad. But note that it is considered as pretty rude from a
>> modern OS to just die because of an application it does not like. Is it
>> fix with the recent 10.6.2 OS X update?
>
> I susp
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
> BH writes:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
>> wrote:
>>> This is pretty bad. But note that it is considered as pretty rude from a
>>> modern OS to just die because of an application it does not like. Is it
BH writes:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> wrote:
>> This is pretty bad. But note that it is considered as pretty rude from a
>> modern OS to just die because of an application it does not like. Is it
>> fix with the recent 10.6.2 OS X update?
>
> I'm still on 10.5.8, w
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
> This is pretty bad. But note that it is considered as pretty rude from a
> modern OS to just die because of an application it does not like. Is it
> fix with the recent 10.6.2 OS X update?
I'm still on 10.5.8, with no plans to move to
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
> This is pretty bad. But note that it is considered as pretty rude from a
> modern OS to just die because of an application it does not like. Is it
> fix with the recent 10.6.2 OS X update?
I suspect that OSX dies when we kill a process with pid==-1 %-|
Bennett, cou
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> I am baffled by this problem.
So am I.
> Juergen, I guess this means that 1.6.4.2
> should wait.
Yes, I already removed the tarballs. I'm glad we detected the problem before
the release. However, these Mac OS X extra releases are beginning to annoy me
:-/
Jürgen
BH writes:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 9:26 AM, BH wrote:
>> With recent branch, when I attempt to spellcheck any document I get a
>> hard crash of all user processes, dumping me back to the login screen.
>
> After further investigation, it turns out this crash was introduced
> with Jean-Marc's no-
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 9:26 AM, BH wrote:
> With recent branch, when I attempt to spellcheck any document I get a
> hard crash of all user processes, dumping me back to the login screen.
After further investigation, it turns out this crash was introduced
with Jean-Marc's no-fork patch (to get thi
With recent branch, when I attempt to spellcheck any document I get a
hard crash of all user processes, dumping me back to the login screen.
Because everything crashes, I can't get good debug information, but
here's what's written to the console:
11/9/09 1:15:01 AM [0x0-0xcc0cc].org.lyx.lyx[70895
28 matches
Mail list logo
