On 10/2/18 6:51 AM, Daniel wrote:
> On 01/10/2018 03:05, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
>> I take it that the reason to have versioned user directories is so
>> people can have parallel installations of 2.2 and 2.3, say. But you can
>> still do that, of course, by manually setting the user directory.
On 01/10/2018 03:05, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
I take it that the reason to have versioned user directories is so
people can have parallel installations of 2.2 and 2.3, say. But you can
still do that, of course, by manually setting the user directory. How
many people do that anyway on Windows?
Le 01/10/2018 à 17:28, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit :
On 10/1/18 4:02 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote:
Le 01/10/2018 à 03:05, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit :
[...]
I take it that the reason to have versioned user directories is so
people can have parallel installations of 2.2 and 2.3, say. But
On 10/1/18 4:02 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote:
> Le 01/10/2018 à 03:05, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit :
> [...]
>>
>> I take it that the reason to have versioned user directories is so
>> people can have parallel installations of 2.2 and 2.3, say. But you can
>> still do that, of course, by manual
lly only
> one thing causing the problem, testing LyX as I go until the offending
> item shows up.
Thanks for the example.
>> I wonder if, all things considered, a better option would be to stop
>> using versioned user directories on Windows, at least. Then no special
>> c
Le 01/10/2018 à 03:05, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit :
[...]
I take it that the reason to have versioned user directories is so
people can have parallel installations of 2.2 and 2.3, say. But you can
still do that, of course, by manually setting the user directory. How
many people do that anyway
d directory, since there is usually only one thing
causing the problem, testing LyX as I go until the offending item shows up.
I wonder if, all things considered, a better option would be to stop
using versioned user directories on Windows, at least. Then no special
copying is needed, etc. If we did
s some problem with the old
preferences? Something seems wrong about this to me.
I wonder if, all things considered, a better option would be to stop
using versioned user directories on Windows, at least. Then no special
copying is needed, etc. If we did this for 2.4, then we could tell
people
