On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 11:04:01AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:54:00PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >>
> >> Something like that?
> >
> > Second try.
>
> So, what can we do for 1.5? I do not think that such an ex
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Richard Heck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I was on the phone yesterday with a friend of mine when LyX crashed on
him. I believe it was because he had loaded a file from a network
drive and then lost his network connection.
And was it with a boost exception?
Richard Heck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was on the phone yesterday with a friend of mine when LyX crashed on
> him. I believe it was because he had loaded a file from a network
> drive and then lost his network connection.
And was it with a boost exception?
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> So shall I apply it? We won't be able to go much further without heavy
> changes like what Andre' did IMO.
Please do. At least it improves the situation.
Jürgen
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:54:00PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
Something like that?
Second try.
So, what can we do for 1.5? I do not think that such an extensive
patch is a good idea. What would be a si
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jürgen Spitzmüller) writes:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> So, what can we do for 1.5? I do not think that such an extensive
>> patch is a good idea. What would be a simpler solution? My patch was
>> quite safe, but I am not even sure of what reports it fixes. Or we
>> could d
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> So, what can we do for 1.5? I do not think that such an extensive
> patch is a good idea. What would be a simpler solution? My patch was
> quite safe, but I am not even sure of what reports it fixes. Or we
> could decide that this case (unreadable directory makes LyX c
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:54:00PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>>
>> Something like that?
>
> Second try.
So, what can we do for 1.5? I do not think that such an extensive
patch is a good idea. What would be a simpler solution? My patch was
quite safe,
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 03:23:39PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:54:00PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >>
> >> Something like that?
> >
> > Second try.
>
> I like it a lot. Note that is_directory has the same probl
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 02:23:07PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >Something like that?
>
> Fine with me. So you are going to replace all those I hope?
>
> Find all "fs::exists", Subfolders, Find Results 1, "lyx-trunk",
> "*.c;*.cpp;*.cxx;*.cc;*.tli;*.tlh;*.h;*.hpp;*.hx
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:54:00PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>>
>> Something like that?
>
> Second try.
I like it a lot. Note that is_directory has the same problem.
JMarc
Andre Poenitz wrote:
Something like that?
Fine with me. So you are going to replace all those I hope?
Find all "fs::exists", Subfolders, Find Results 1, "lyx-trunk",
"*.c;*.cpp;*.cxx;*.cc;*.tli;*.tlh;*.h;*.hpp;*.hxx;*.hh"
D:\devel\lyx\trunk\src\Buffer.cpp(418): if
(fs::exists(bname.toFiles
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:54:00PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
Something like that?
Second try.
This kind of thing:
- if (layout_file.empty() ||
!fs::exists(layout_file.toFilesystemEncoding()))
+ if (layout_file.empty() || !layout_file.exists())
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:54:00PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> Something like that?
Second try.
Andre'
Index: TextClass.cpp
===
--- TextClass.cpp (revision 21005)
+++ TextClass.cpp (working copy)
@@ -30,12 +30,8 @@
Something like that?
Index: Buffer.h
===
--- Buffer.h(revision 21005)
+++ Buffer.h(working copy)
@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@
bool isExternallyModified(CheckMethod method) const;
/// save timestamp and checksum of t
15 matches
Mail list logo
