Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> I did this now and sent him a patch to fix marvosym.sty.
Very good. Thanks.
> The problem is
> indeed that the new marvosym maintainer changed the command definitions
> from \providecommand to \newcommand with the actual release from 2006.
I think it used \def in earlier ve
>> For now I'll add a hint to the docs, when this is OK by you.
>
> Yes, please add a note that g-brief and the current version of marvosym are
> incompatible. We could also add a similar note to the g-brief templates.
I'll wait for a reply of the marvosym-maintainer before I proceed.
> BTW I th
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> > Provided I have administration rights or at least the right to copy and
> > change
>
> > the file in my home texmf.
>
> You don't need admin rights as the files are already in the global texmf
> folder and you can copy them to your private one.
Given that I'm allowed to do th
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
>> want. When you have installed g-brief on your LaTeX-system you
>> automatically also have installed g-brief2.
>
> Provided I have administration rights or at least the right to copy and change
> the file in my home texmf.
You don't need admin rights as the files are already i
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> >> As far as I know there are no dropped commands.
> >
> > What about \Telefon, for instance?
>
> \Telefon has not been dropped, it was replaced by \TelephoneRowA. That's
> what I meant should be converted when we switch from g-brief to g-brief2.
And if it's used as ERT or re
>> As far as I know there are no dropped commands.
>
> What about \Telefon, for instance?
\Telefon has not been dropped, it was replaced by \TelephoneRowA. That's what I meant should be
converted when we switch from g-brief to g-brief2.
>> > How about letters that include style files that rel
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> > Are you sure that everything done with gbrief can be reproduced 100% (I
> > mean: 100%) with gbrief2?
>
> Yes as far as I know.
"As far as I know" is not enough.
> > How about letters that use ERT commands that have been
> > dropped in gbrief2?
>
> As far as I know there
> Are you sure that everything done with gbrief can be reproduced 100% (I mean:
> 100%) with gbrief2?
Yes as far as I know.
> How about letters that use ERT commands that have been
> dropped in gbrief2?
As far as I know there are no dropped commands. The only one I could found id the command \B
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> So the correct "fix" is to drop the two g-brief layouts and add a routine
> in lyx2lyx that converts files from g-brief to g-brief2. This is a file
> format change so I would say wontfix for LyX 1.5.x.
Are you sure that everything done with gbrief can be reproduced 100% (I mean:
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Besides this, tables work fine with g-brief2, see the latest attachment to
> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4037
Irrelevant. This bug has to be fixed nevertheless, it's not bound to gbrief
only.
Jürgen
Concerning bug 4037:
g-brief is unusable since about a year. The reason is this entry in g-brief.cls:
\IfFileExists{marvosym.sty}
{\RequirePackage{marvosym}}
{}
\def\Telefon#1{\def\telefon{#1}} \def\telefon{}
But marvosym has already defined the command \Telefon. There is no way I know to
11 matches
Mail list logo
