Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> "path" descriptive? You got to be joking :-)
> If it were a string it would be ok.
>
> withPath, withFullPath, fullPath, absPath, addPath
>
> ... perhaps addFullPath? or just addPath.
ok ok.
> >> This looks a bit dangerous. You are deleting iterators from the vector
>
I had a closer look at bug 20 and the context stuff in tex2lyx. The
outcome is the attached patch, which ensures that we don't create
invalid .lyx files anymore. The Contexts were not always used correctly
until now (I am guilty of that, too). This is now fixed, and I added some
comments in ord
Am Mittwoch, 20. Juli 2005 15:27 schrieb Georg Baum:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
> > It still goes to standard output if there is only one parameter,
> > right?
>
> Yes.
>
> > Do we really want that?
>
> I don't care.
>
> > What about translating file.tex to
> > file.lyx? (and have - as
This is tested and going in tomorrow if nobody objects.
Georg
diff -p -r -U 3 -X excl.tmp lyx-1.4-clean/src/frontends/gtk/ChangeLog lyx-1.4-cvs/src/frontends/gtk/ChangeLog
--- lyx-1.4-clean/src/frontends/gtk/ChangeLog 2005-07-18 21:19:32.0 +0200
+++ lyx-1.4-cvs/src/frontends/gtk/ChangeLog
Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| This is tested and going in tomorrow if nobody objects.
Ok.
But remember that that is not how it works anymore.
Only explict ok before commit from now on.
But of course since gtk is not really supported yet, it is exempt from
the rule.
--
Lgb
Georg Baum wrote:
> Nobody answered this one.
>
> Do we want
> tex2lyx infile.tex
>
> to create infile.lyx or do we want it to write to stdout like it is doing
> now?
I think that it should write to stdout. I think that we should also support
$ tex2lyx -o outfile.lyx infile.tex
$ tex2lyx -
On Sunday 24 July 2005 11:14, Georg Baum wrote:
> LyX would otherwise create invalid .tex files.
> Apart from some parboxes I get now _identical_ .ps files on the userguide
> roundtrip.
If it fixes that error and you confidant that it is the right fix then
please do it.
--
José Abílio Matos
