On 11/02/2015 10:44 AM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 11:47:42PM -0500, PhilipPirrip wrote:
Hi Enrico, thank you for your response. I hope the others will help us
resolve this too.
Given the overwhelming amount of replies, I doubt anyone is interested
in this matter.
Oh no, no, you're wrong. This is what I received from one of the well
known developers: "Enrico is the Jedi Master of such things. I'd suggest
you re-send this just to him."
I'd say they all trust your judgment.
You type some, but Windows has to spawn a shell, cmd.com, to execute it.
some.bat has no binary code in it, and it is not executable in that sense.
And linux has to do exactly the same in order to run a script.
With one difference: windows has one single shell, and linux - how
many?, half a million?
Anway... some of the developers here assumed TEXINPUTS covers even bib
files. (see the posts on \input@path) I wouldn't mind if BIBINPUTS were not
even configurable, make them . and the current document directory.
I don't see why this is such a big deal. It's even standard latex behavior,
it always searches in the current dir. The trouble with LyX is that it
compiles in a temp dir, but does not copy any files it does not know of.
This last observation suggests what is the minimal change to be performed,
i.e., let the latex run work as if the document dir was the current
directory. This means setting the relevant environment variables such
that the document dir is also scanned, without replicating the setting
for TEXINPUTS. I'll prepare a patch along these lines for review.
I thank you for that! I'd be glad to be the first one to test it in both
Windows and Linux.
BTW; I once before suggested there should be a command similar to
\input@path defined, that will contain the path to the current document
folder with absolutely no latex formatting in it.
That could be used in modules for LaTeX packages that have no support in
LyX. The fact that LyX compiles its documents in a temp folder makes the
implementation of such (underground, but still) enhancements very hard.
Georg, are you reading this?
Philip Pirrip wrote on 2015-09-02:
> Since the way \input@path is being used in the biblatex hack from
> http://wiki.lyx.org/BibTeX/Biblatex is barely legal, maybe LyX should
> define its own command, say \LyX@basepath that'd contain the absolute
> path to the master .lyx document (no qoutes, no curly braces - only for
> the brave).
> Would you be willing to do that? (being that biblatex support is nowhere
> on the horizon yet)
Georg: After all these discussions it is clear that something like this
is needed.
However, I do not want to clutter all documents with that (since 95% of the
users don't need it). I would prefer a solution where we extend the layout
definition language so that you could use a placeholder that will be
replaced by LyX with the master document path. Then everybody who needs
this
path could write a module that pulls in the path into a LaTeX macro in the
most simple case, or in more advanced cases it could directly be used in
the
preamble code that needs it.
