On Tuesday 04 March 2003 10:20 am, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> Ok to apply to 1.3.x Jean-Marc?
>
> >> Yes.
>
> Angus> Will do. Angus
>
> You did not forget about it, did you?
Hmmm. Looks like I forgot to commit it. Here it is
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> Ok to apply to 1.3.x Jean-Marc?
>> Yes.
Angus> Will do. Angus
You did not forget about it, did you?
JMarc
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 05:46:08PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> The graphics code insists on an absolute path to the file. This
> Angus> patch supplies it with such a path to a previewed snippet when
> Angus> the tmp directory is not used and therefore fixes a crash.
>
> Does it mea
On Wednesday 26 February 2003 4:46 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> The graphics code insists on an absolute path to the file. This
> Angus> patch supplies it with such a path to a previewed snippet when
> Angus> the tmp directo
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> The graphics code insists on an absolute path to the file. This
Angus> patch supplies it with such a path to a previewed snippet when
Angus> the tmp directory is not used and therefore fixes a crash.
Does it mean that preview shoul
The graphics code insists on an absolute path to the file. This patch
supplies it with such a path to a previewed snippet when the tmp directory
is not used and therefore fixes a crash.
Ok to apply to 1.3.x Jean-Marc?
--
AngusIndex: src/graphics/ChangeLog
==
Oscar López wrote:
> Dear developers
>
> I have installed lyx-1.3.0 and preview-latex-common-0.7.8 rpm for
> mandrake. lyx crash when I write an equation (below you can find a
> backtrace)
>
> ==
> Previews generated!
> Cache::add(
Dear developers
I have installed lyx-1.3.0 and preview-latex-common-0.7.8 rpm for
mandrake. lyx crash when I write an equation (below you can find a
backtrace)
==
This is TeX, Version 3.14159 (Web2C 7.3.1)
This is TeX, Version 3.1
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 12:18:07PM -0400, Kuba Ober wrote:
> > > We're talking about humans. Human life time expectation stays fixed when
> >
> > This is not entirely clear, given some of the work going on in the
> > investigation of the aging process. It's entirely conceivable that some
> > of u
On środa 04 wrzesień 2002 09:44 am, John Levon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 09:40:54AM -0400, Kuba Ober wrote:
> > We're talking about humans. Human life time expectation stays fixed when
>
> This is not entirely clear, given some of the work going on in the
> investigation of the aging proces
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 02:21:41PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Well this is now a moot point
Since when did that stop me arguing about something ?
:)
john
--
"Take the ideas you find useful. Try not to get hung up on the labels."
- Jonathan S. Shapiro
On Wednesday 04 September 2002 2:44 pm, John Levon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 09:40:54AM -0400, Kuba Ober wrote:
> > We're talking about humans. Human life time expectation stays fixed when
>
> This is not entirely clear, given some of the work going on in the
> investigation of the aging pr
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 09:40:54AM -0400, Kuba Ober wrote:
> We're talking about humans. Human life time expectation stays fixed when
This is not entirely clear, given some of the work going on in the
investigation of the aging process. It's entirely conceivable that some
of us alive today may l
> > > "Nobody ever needs mor the 1O^12 formulas in his dissertation"
> > >
> > :-) You know I won't do that.
>
> Bill was wrong on a similar occasion...
Yet Bill was talking about computers and expansion of technology that lives
its own life, almost. And he didn't look into the history. Even in m
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 10:16:08AM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > while(nsnippets =>> 1) {
> > ++i;
> > }
> > ndigits = 1 + i / 3;
> >
> > That is, the above is an integer approximation of :
> >
> > ndigits = ceiling(log2(nsnippets)/log2(10));
>
> Thanks, Allan. I'll
On Wednesday 04 September 2002 11:02 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | Yes, true. I believe I went for fixed sizes to ensure that the actual gs
> | output filename was the same as that expected by lyx.
>
> then just prepend the string with '0's.
>
> #in
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Norbert Koksch has discovered a problem with the preview code that is
| triggered if a document contains more than 999 (!) formulae.
>
| The formulae are numbered so:
>
| ostringstream os;
| os << base_
| <<
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Yes, true. I believe I went for fixed sizes to ensure that the actual gs
| output filename was the same as that expected by lyx.
then just prepend the string with '0's.
#include
#include
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int i = 123;
On Wednesday 04 September 2002 6:52 am, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > The setw() call above should obviously be passed the required number of
> > digits. Given the number of snippets, nsnippets, what's the elegant way
> > to get ndigits? This is clearly brain-dead
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Angus Leeming wrote:
> The setw() call above should obviously be passed the required number of
> digits. Given the number of snippets, nsnippets, what's the elegant way to
> get ndigits? This is clearly brain-dead:
>
> ndigits = 1 + int(log10(double(nsnippets)));
>
> but
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 03:00:56PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Not my doing I believe.
>
> (Slightly amazed) so?
No. I know that almost none of the initial proof-of-concept
code is left. And even that was not my doing alone.
> Nor is most of the preview code, even if you were the
> inspir
On Tuesday 03 September 2002 3:24 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 02:40:32PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Norbert Koksch has discovered a problem with the preview code that is
> > triggered if a document contains more than 999 (!) formulae.
> >
> > The formulae are numbered s
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 02:40:32PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Norbert Koksch has discovered a problem with the preview code that is
> triggered if a document contains more than 999 (!) formulae.
>
> The formulae are numbered so:
>
> ostringstream os;
> os << base_
Norbert Koksch has discovered a problem with the preview code that is
triggered if a document contains more than 999 (!) formulae.
The formulae are numbered so:
ostringstream os;
os << base_
<< setfill('0') << setw(3) << counter_++
On Thursday 25 July 2002 10:59 am, Angus Leeming wrote:
> On Thursday 25 July 2002 10:33 am, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > New doc, C-m, right-click on formula to get the math panel. Boom.
> >
> > It works without preview enabled, or when starting the panel from the
> > menu. It might be my code that's
On Thursday 25 July 2002 10:33 am, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> New doc, C-m, right-click on formula to get the math panel. Boom.
>
> It works without preview enabled, or when starting the panel from the
> menu. It might be my code that's faulty, but as preview triggers it...
It works fine here.
One t
New doc, C-m, right-click on formula to get the math panel. Boom.
It works without preview enabled, or when starting the panel from the
menu. It might be my code that's faulty, but as preview triggers it...
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have,
Looks pretty trivial André:
aleem@pneumon:src-> ./lyx
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159-13d (Web2C 7.3.1)
This is dvips(k) 5.86 Copyright 1999 Radical Eye Software (www.radicaleye.com)
' TeX output 2002.06.27:0941' -> preview_EcEeHcEc.eps
. [1]
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159-13d (Web2C 7.3.1)
This
28 matches
Mail list logo
