-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 12/05/2015 07:05 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 07:16:02PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> Le 24/11/2015 18:57, Richard Heck a écrit : >>> I was mostly thinking that (a) if we're going to add this for 2.2, the >>> tex2lyx part should also be done---the rule you quoted applies to >>> mid-cycle commits and doesn't say anything about what should be done for >>> a major release---and (b) that the test file I attached (a minimal >>> modification of the existing one) gets totally mangled. The \verbatim* >>> command isn't even output properly as ERT. >>> >>> This actually seems to be an existing bug: >> >> I will try to do the tex2lyx part ASAP. The bug that you see is probably >> because there is some ugly stuff in the environment. I am not sure there is >> something to fix besides adding support for verbatim*. > > Did we fix the tex2lyx part? If not, should we make a trac ticket to > make sure we don't forget about this?
I think JMarc did it. rh -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWY38rAAoJENf89boc69qpYCkIAKaZPItG6lLosW4DPecWjsun mVa87V80zWbATIySOIO1PBHU7xmohvPPXgW6iHKL605rNsS4h/G2AnQsok//3qNY BjuLCLLp7LKpqecUeYjzw2g/SGC7YxVHDaNZJO8IXwy4trtnnq15OGkAwOp1/888 1rS3EY8wAjUWFjEZVMk1pRH8ZCXpKFeOfacFUEI0fRuWM2Mmuy8AcLW0QKuDkEQC EEwupsviuj5PbAoBQyGeIYd7GaC72mWigR8LFD8GCA7M49rMuVeQs56Lzlnc7vJE Jr/wcpDS8rXRjdMkxti9YJyDn4yy/4up8aCX74+oQtlXBqZorYmd5e5D7bmsRyk= =xtRW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
