Problem compiling spellchecker.C
Dear LyX Developers,
I have encountered a bug when compiling LyX 1.0 PR6 on a HP-UX platform.
Machine: HP 720, HP-UX 9.01
Compiler: gcc 2.8.1
The problem occurs in the file spellchecker.C. The compiler produces the
following error:
gcc -c -g -O2 -fpcc-struct-return -I. -I. -I../images -I/usr/include/X11R5
spellchecker.C
spellchecker.C: In function `void create_ispell_pipe(const class LString
)':
spellchecker.C:335: passing `fd_set *' as argument 2 of `select(unsigned
int, int *, int *, int *, const timeval *)'
The line in spellchecker.C causing the problem is
retval = select(pipeout[0]+1, infds, 0, 0, tv);
"infds" is declared a few lines previously as
fd_set infds;
which is what is causing the problem. I did some digging around, and the
following is the best explanation I could come up with (along with an ugly
hack to fix the problem).
In "sys/time.h", the protoype for the function "select" is:
extern int select(size_t, int *, int *, int *, const struct timeval *);
In "sys/types.h", "fd_set" is defined as
typedef struct fd_set{
fd_mask fds_bits[howmany(FD_SETSIZE, NFDBITS)];
} fd_set;
In the same header, "fd_mask" is defined as
typedef long fd_mask;
On this machine, int and long int both use 4 bytes. So, without having any
idea what it all means, here's my nasty hack to get spellchecker.C to
compile:
I assumed that, since fd_set has only a single member, fds_bits, that this
is the value to be passed as the second argument to the function "select"
So, I modified line 335 of spellchecker.C as follows:
retval = select(pipeout[0]+1, (int *)infds.fds_bits, 0, 0, tv);
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but this allows LyX to compile, and
run. The spellchecker seems to work okay too.
I hope this helps,
Daragh.
--
Daragh McDonnell,
D.S.P. Research Group,
University College Dublin.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: (+353 1) 706 1964
Re: pre8 configure wont succeed on IRIX-5.3
*Roland Krause writes: | Oh and the most important thing. Although configure stop with an | error, make runs fine and lyx compiles (with a few warnings) | nicely. Runs too... I *think* that xforms 0.88 has the libxpm funcitions included, so linking to libxpm is strictly not needed. Lgb
Re: anon cvs?
*Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes: | You could try: | CVSROOT=:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/lyxsrc/cvsroot rather: CVSROOT=:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/lyxsrc/cvsroot The password is either cvs or lyx. Lgb PS. I think this should work, tell me if not.
Re: New PR interim as attachment
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 12:03:51PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Martin 1. Which text to use as basis for further work. Mine, or
Martin Larry's?
Yours, of course. I think the latest version is pretty good and was
rather surprised to see Larry qualify it as 'weak'...
Certainly, yours, Martin. But I hope you get lots of additional comments
from other people, take another look at mine, and do some more thinking
about what we're trying to accomplish.
I'm from a school of thought that's definitely *not* mainstream here.
I think LyX is an amazing piece of word processing software, built on
top of a remarkably robust foundation. I've heard some longtime Mac
users talking about OS/X lately ("great interface -- perhaps the best
GUI available -- now on top of an extremely powerful and stable OS"),
and they've captured some of my feelings about what distinguishes LyX from
WordPerfect, M$ Word and their breed.
We have an opportunity to take the open source world by storm. And even
to get major media coverage -- even more than The Gimp ever has. We
could write (pre-release) articles that put LyX systematically alongside
WordPerfect and make the comparison. We could target a press release
and ship it off to all the authors of recent media pieces about open
source and WordPerfect coming to Linux (lexis-nexis: .ns;open source or
Wordperfect w/i 5 linux).
However, I don't think this works as well without a more complete set
of example documents, templates, alternative textclasses, than we have
now.
"Hollywood" is a very nice example of what we ought to have in about
five more categories.
I have two documents -- unfortunately using hacked LaTeX preambles
instead of disciplined textclasses so far -- that could be entitled
"Business Plan" and "Presentation Book".
I've asked the list a couple of times whether there was sufficient interest
in collecting together examples documents, for us to establish an ftp site
where people could post their efforts. There has never been much of a
response, which I suggests my views are atypical.
It's too bad. If I had my druthers, I'd say lock down the code base, then
let's devote two months to taking out all our BEST, most impressive LyX
documents, formats, etc. and create an outstanding set of included files
that will blow the socks off new users. Frankly, I think the current
release strategy is perhaps too rushed, perhaps too timid.
But I'm just one guy, and not a contributer to the LyX code base. Still,
I'm here to speak freely, ready to give and receive criticism, to do
whatever I can to help promote a truly outstanding open source package.
Best regards
--
Larry S. Marso
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New PR interim as attachment
"Martin" == Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Martin ... more convenient for some of you. I read it, and I like what I saw, beside some comments from Larry with which I happen to agree (see my answer to him). I think this language Which are those? draws a reasonable line between boring technical description and nonsensical hype. JMarc Anyway, I am rather lost now. So how to continue? 1. Which text to use as basis for further work. Mine, or Larry's? 2. Document processor. Yes/no? 3. Mention Linux and Open Source. (LyX AND LaTeX) Yes. (But remember, LyX is not ONLY for Linux). 4. Comparison with Word and WP -- hesitant. 5. "No familiarity" disclaimer. OK. How then? 6. HELP! Martin
Re: lyx-1.0.0pre8 problems (2 make problems, 1 bug still there :
"Carl" == Carl Ollivier-Gooch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2) Lines like [lyx.C:15] FD_form_title *fdui = (FD_form_title *) fl_calloc(1, sizeof(*fdui)); gives the warning from AIX's xlC "lyx.C", line 15.64: 1540-101: (W) "fdui" may be used before being set. Carl This should be Carl FD_form_title *fdui = (FD_form_title *) fl_calloc(1, Carl sizeof(FD_form_title)); Carl to keep xLC (and other equally picky compilers) from Carl complaining. As Jean-Marc said, xforms does this automatically. Carl I'm attaching a new version of fdfix.sh that uses sed Carl (awkwardly, I think) to make this change. The patch for this Carl one would be nearly as long as the file, including the comments Carl I added about the cryptic sed commands that I added. It seems to me then the following simpler sed rule works equally well: -e 's/\(\(FD_[^ ]*\) \*fdui.*\)sizeof(\*fdui)/\1sizeof(\2)/' If you do not have any objection, I'll use that. Thanks also for the other patch. I'll add the #if 0 version, so that we can decide later to remove everything. JMarc
Re: 1.0.0pre8 problem
"Reuben" == Reuben Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Reuben I had just started entering some LaTeX text, and had entered
Reuben "\conc{}" then went back to just after the open bracket and
Reuben starting typing "autoconf" when LyX vanished (just after it
Reuben got to the "c"). I presume it segfaulted, but since I started
Reuben it directly from a window manager menu, I can't tell. The
Reuben emergency save worked flawlessly, though.
Reuben I've not had any stability problems with the 1.0.0pre7
Reuben snapshot that was made available.
Reuben Sorry I can't be more specific about the problem.
Please tell us if you find out more info (or a way to reproduce that).
JMarc
Re: lyx-server-question
"Sven" == Sven Gustke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sven Hi out there! I´m working with the lyx-server very well. It is Sven a wonderfull thing. But the only thing I can´t do (possibly Sven that´s my fault!? ) is "open a file". The only thing I can do is Sven to open the dialog File Open. There is no parameter for the Sven file name. So, what can I do? Thank you! That's something I've been wanting to do for some time: change functions that query interactively for arguments (to insert insets, open files...) so that they can take an argument and use that directly. This is of course an 1.1 job (for example, we could implement the MRU list of the File menu with a 'menu-open foo'), but the menu-open part is so important for scripts that I think we should do it now. So, I'll add that in 1.0.1. JMarc
Re: WYSIWYM printing
"Reuben" == Reuben Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Reuben As well as (or perhaps instead of) specifying page ranges, it Reuben should be possible to give section ranges. This would indeed be a nice thing, and could be controled completely from inside LyX. But I think there should be some kind of interface aroud that, and it will take time to gt right (i.e. intuitive). JMarc
Re: Bug report 1.0.0pre6
"Alejandro" == Alejandro Aguilar Sierra [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Alejandro On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Do you want me to commit your previous patch? Would you be interested in UMR:s from purify concerning w? (I think I have seen some) Alejandro Did it work for you? If that's the case please do it. No, it didn't do anything for me. However, if it is a resonable cleanup, I'll commit it. Alejandro Yes, please. I'll try to hunt for more UMR:s, then. JMarc
Re: New PR interim as attachment
"Martin" == Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Martin ... more convenient for some of you. I read it, and I like what I saw, beside some comments from Larry with which I happen to agree (see my answer to him). I think this language draws a reasonable line between boring technical description and nonsensical hype. JMarc
Re: PR woes
"Larry" == Larry S Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Larry Reviewing the draft PR earlier this week, I felt it was weak, Larry pitched the wrong tune and would sail past most everyone Larry unfamiliar with LyX or at least LaTeX. Larry I was so concerned that I wrote a virtual alternative. Larry Seeing the latest redraft, frankly I think we've made very Larry little progress. I'll try making my points in "critique" form. I see you are very appreciative of Martin's work... Although some of your critics are valid, I think your are being a bit unfair here. Larry (i) "Document processor" is an utterly meaningless term. OK, let's give it a meaning. LyX is a document processor. If you process only words, you can't have a concept of section of references. If you process a document, you can. Isn't that what you explain later? Larry (ii) Absolutely say "open source" -- and often. Also with the Larry first reference to LaTeX. Right. Larry I suggest: Compared to WordPerfect or Microsoft Word, LyX automates the structure, layout and formatting of your documents according to pre-set rules for different types -- e.g., letters, articles, books, even Hollywood scripts -- selected using an easy, point and click interface. Lyx produces high quality, professionally typeset output, freeing the user to concentrate on *writing*. Right. (see above) Larry The current language often sounds like a press release for Larry Thot. (Raise you hand if you've heard of Thot). Grmph. If you ever had the curiosity to have a look at my e-mail address and run thot, you would have known the answer. Unfortunately, I have not yet found the key sequence to raise my hand in a message. Larry (v) LyX is fully functional groupware. Mention it! I suggest: LyX also offers sophisticated version control features, for group collaboration on complex documents. Hmm, are the version control features 'sophisticated'? I have to admit I did not use the version control features, but I'd describe them as basic. Were they sophisticated, I'd expect to have a way to see revisions to a text. Larry (vi) Get into the message, relatively early, that LyX has added Larry a number of things in the last twelve-eighteen months that were Larry lacking before. I bump into lots of people who tried LyX back Larry before it had any of the features I describe in the suggestions Larry below, and don't realize it's evolved: The LyX interface offers the familiar look and feel of a WYSIWYG graphical user interface word processor. In addition to several pre-set standard document formats, this release 1.0.0 of LyX offers the user extensive control over fonts, margins, headers/footers, spacing, "bullet/dash" symbols used for multi-level outlines, the structure and appearance of complex tables, even the use of color characters. Except for table improvments, everything that you mention here was already present in 0.12.0. This does not make sense. If you frequently use mathematical formulas or notation, *drop everything* and try LyX today. The math panel interface, for point-and-click creation of complex mathematical statements, and superlative typeset output is easily best-of-breed. Larry OK. Too strong. Maybe say "If you frequently use ... you Larry simply *must* try LyX." And what about superlative typeset output? Larry (viii) Still, we need some language to convey how LyX works, Larry what makes it different. WYSIWYM alone doesn't cut it. I Larry suggested: You set the ground rules, leaving the finer points of document layout to LyX's highly advanced, intelligent rendering engine. Think of LyX as the first "WYSIWYM" word processor: What You See Is What You MEAN. You tell LyX how to treat particular words and lines in your document: e.g., this is standard text, this is a Section title, this is a footnote, this is a caption beneath an inserted graphic. As you make your selections, the WYSIWYM interface gives you clean, straightforward "visual clues" (actually, very WYSIWYG-like). LaTeX then processes your document into professionally typseset output, which can be quickly viewed and updated with xdvi or ghostview. OK. New users will be astonished by certain basic LyX features. For example, hitting the space bar repeatedly, it is *impossible* to enter more than one space between words. That's because LaTeX figures out spacing for you, intelligently. Let's say that you tell LyX a certain line is a Section title. LaTeX takes care of adding the Section to your table of contents, placing the Section name into your header (where appropriate), starting a new page, assigning the Section a number or label, formating its appearance on the page, and telling other parts of your document what page it's on (for references). Many of the headaches associated with word processing simply vanish. I think something like this belongs to the LGT, and that the LGT should be proeminently linked in the press release. Larry
Re: pre8 configure wont succeed on IRIX-5.3
Hello,
I'm not sure what happens, but it looks weird. From the relevant
snippet of config.log appended to this message, it seems that some
objects in your libXpm library (CrBufFrI.o) are broken. Since
configure relies on one of these broken objects to detect the library,
the test fails. Fortunately, the .o files needed to link LyX are *not*
broken.
I thik I can't do much about it. You should re-build your library.
JMarc
configure:2700: checking for XpmCreateBufferFromImage in -lXpm
configure:2722: g++ -o conftest -g -O2-L/usr/local/lib conftest.C -lXpm -l
SM -lICE -liberty -lc -lm -lX11 15
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
/usr/bin/../lib/ld:
Object file format error in: /usr/local/lib/libXpm.a(CrBufFrI.o): bad symbolic he
ader (magic number)
configure: failed program was:
#line 2708 "configure"
#include "confdefs.h"
/* Override any gcc2 internal prototype to avoid an error. */
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C"
#endif
/* We use char because int might match the return type of a gcc2
builtin and then its argument prototype would still apply. */
char XpmCreateBufferFromImage();
int main() {
XpmCreateBufferFromImage()
; return 0; }
co
Re: New PR interim as attachment
I've asked the list a couple of times whether there was sufficient interest in collecting together examples documents, for us to establish an ftp site where people could post their efforts. There has never been much of a response, which I suggests my views are atypical. This is a great idea, and I think everybody agrees on this. (If nobody answers, that often means that people agree, or alternatively don't know what are you talking about. In this case, I think it's the former. But on a mailing list, it feels strange to hit the reply button and write "yeah, me too", because you don't want to hurt the signal/noise ration with such mails.) But nobody has volunteered to coordinate it, so nothing has happened. I suggest that you start by uploading your documents to ftp.lyx.org, and announce it on this list. Then people can have a look at it, and when enough documents have surfaces, something more formal could be done about it. Greets, Asger P.S. Regarding the LGT, Steven (of NT port fame) has put it on his web-site: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~steven/lgt/lgt-0.3.html P.P.S. Since la1ad is not going to have PHP upgraded, I'm not sure what to do about the web site... I'll have time on Tuesday, take a shower, and then we'll see.
Re: New PR interim as attachment
The question most interesting to me is whether there is interest in treating the 1.0 release as a major breakpoint, a time to attract (and assist) new users for the LyX platform. A formal effort would certainly require a period of time set aside to the task of preparing new accompanying material (particularly templates and document classes) in a disciplined fashion, and probably for the effort to become the dominent "development" effort for six to eight weeks. Documentation seems very well developed, but other basics that would enable users to become "immediately more productive" haven't received any emphasis at all. We have a foundation in place to go way beyond the simple packages that come bundled with LaTeX, the intriguing Hollywood showing us the way. Going out brightly into the open source world offering "Article, Report, Book, (the badly broken) Letter" will befuddle new users. What's the point of calling this a 1.0 release? I've spoken here often of LyX being "so close to greatness I can taste it". OK, we can't hide ERT for awhile. But I don't see why we don't set aside a little time to add a few more Hollywoods to the list. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 05:01:06PM +0100, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: I've asked the list a couple of times whether there was sufficient interest in collecting together examples documents, for us to establish an ftp site where people could post their efforts. There has never been much of a response, which I suggests my views are atypical. This is a great idea, and I think everybody agrees on this. (If nobody answers, that often means that people agree, or alternatively don't know what are you talking about. In this case, I think it's the former. But on a mailing list, it feels strange to hit the reply button and write "yeah, me too", because you don't want to hurt the signal/noise ration with such mails.) But nobody has volunteered to coordinate it, so nothing has happened. I suggest that you start by uploading your documents to ftp.lyx.org, and announce it on this list. Then people can have a look at it, and when enough documents have surfaces, something more formal could be done about it. Greets, Asger P.S. Regarding the LGT, Steven (of NT port fame) has put it on his web-site: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~steven/lgt/lgt-0.3.html P.P.S. Since la1ad is not going to have PHP upgraded, I'm not sure what to do about the web site... I'll have time on Tuesday, take a shower, and then we'll see.
Re: New PR interim as attachment
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 21:33:31 +0200 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The question most interesting to me is whether there is interest in treating the 1.0 release as a major breakpoint, a time to attract (and assist) new users for the LyX platform. A formal effort would certainly require a period of time set aside to the task of preparing new accompanying material (particularly templates and document classes) in a disciplined fashion, and probably for the effort to become the dominent "development" effort for six to eight weeks. Documentation seems very well developed, but other basics that would enable users to become "immediately more productive" haven't received any emphasis at all. We have a foundation in place to go way beyond the simple packages that come bundled with LaTeX, the intriguing Hollywood showing us the way. Going out brightly into the open source world offering "Article, Report, Book, (the badly broken) Letter" will befuddle new users. What's the point of calling this a 1.0 release? There is something in this, really. Right now, it seems that our institute is going to standardize on some format for its reports and publications. Somehow, I have to be able to produce this format. Of course LyX/LaTeX can do that, but it either requires writing a new .cls and .layout file (based on Article, I assume) which doesn't attract me, or kludging. And even if I managed this, many more out there would never manage it. What we need really is not so much NUMERICALLY more classes and layouts, but ways to tailor the ones we have in many small ways. Like the "geometry" package does already for the margins and the Allan Rae thing for bullet list symbols. But similar things for section header formats, numbering, etc. etc. We have been making progress, but more is needed. So that simple people are not lost in the situation I am in. Currently I got article.cls patched (into fgiart.cls) but I am lost as to how to change the bibliography layout. I got rid of the item numbers (which I wanted) but not the [] symbols around them. Any ideas? Martin
Re: pre8 configure wont succeed on IRIX-5.3
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 06:11:09PM -0600, Roland Krause wrote: Trying to build lyx-1.0.0-pre8 on my IRIX-5.3... When running configure it stops with pocus ./configure --with-extra-includes=/usr/local/include --with-extra-lib=/usr/local/lib ...chugging away for a while ** Can't find libXpm. Please check that the Xpm library is correctly installed on your system. of course libXpm is installed pocus ls -l /usr/local/lib/libXpm.a -rw-rw-r--1 rokrau admin 101396 Sep 14 14:26 /usr/local/lib/libXpm.a The version is: pocus: ls -l /usr/local/src/*xpm* -r--rw-r--1 rokrau admin 475621 Apr 16 1998 /usr/local/src/xpm-3.4k-irix.tgz I'm not sure what version I've got, but I think it's 3.4g or so. I haven't bothered keeping it up to date. Anyway, it works just fine on IRIX 6.2, so I don't think it's an IRIX issue. Which is to say, it may be an IRIX issue, but it's probably that 3.4k doesn't work, not that libXpm is screwed up in general on IRIX. -Amir
Re: WYSIWYM printing
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 08:53:15AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: "Reuben" == Reuben Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Reuben As well as (or perhaps instead of) specifying page ranges, it Reuben should be possible to give section ranges. This would indeed be a nice thing, and could be controled completely from inside LyX. But I think there should be some kind of interface aroud that, and it will take time to gt right (i.e. intuitive). This is a great idea, and much more WYSIWYM, as Reuben suggested in the subject line. I'm imagining a table of contents popup, where you could highlight the (contiguous?) sections you want to print. As long as we're doing that, why not take it a step further. Using the TOC or some other method, allow the user to select portions of the document and do various operations. Spellcheck, Save as, Export (harder. Bug prone?) are just a few ideas. -Amir
Re: WYSIWYM printing
amir added, As long as we're doing that, why not take it a step further. Using the TOC or some other method, allow the user to select portions of the document and do various operations. Spellcheck, Save as, Export (harder. Bug prone?) are just a few ideas. Wouldn't being able to do this for export be requried in order to do it for printing? rick --
Re: New PR interim as attachment
In general I agree with Jean Marc, except: Martin 4. Comparison with Word and WP -- hesitant. I am hesitant about the principle, but the paragraph is interesting. You could change the beginning to ``Compared to classical Word Processors like WordPerfect or Microsoft Word,...''. If you mention those wps you have to give more details to compare, as Larry suggested. Just describing them as "classical wps" is not fair. As I said already, that goes better in a review article. IMO don't mention them at all. - add the bit about WP and Word (if it does not take too much precious space). This supports my opinion against mentioning them. Why to waste valuable space? I insist in that the PR should be as short as possible. Greets, Alejandro
Re: WYSIWYM printing
Commands affecting portions of your text keyed off LyX's understanding of sections, subsections, etc.? *Very* cool. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 12:59:31PM -0500, Amir Karger wrote: On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 08:53:15AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: "Reuben" == Reuben Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Reuben As well as (or perhaps instead of) specifying page ranges, it Reuben should be possible to give section ranges. This would indeed be a nice thing, and could be controled completely from inside LyX. But I think there should be some kind of interface aroud that, and it will take time to gt right (i.e. intuitive). This is a great idea, and much more WYSIWYM, as Reuben suggested in the subject line. I'm imagining a table of contents popup, where you could highlight the (contiguous?) sections you want to print. As long as we're doing that, why not take it a step further. Using the TOC or some other method, allow the user to select portions of the document and do various operations. Spellcheck, Save as, Export (harder. Bug prone?) are just a few ideas. -Amir
Re: New PR interim as attachment
Larry, you've made some very good points. Most of the folks on the devel list have been using LyX for a long time, and it's hard for us to look at it from the perspective of new users, especially ones who don't even know LaTeX. That said, I think it's too late to stop 1.0. The LyXers have been saying for a long time that all LyX really needed was decent LaTeX import and it could be released as 1.0. Thanks to the work of a few brilliant programmers (it's friday!) we've now got LaTeX import which I'll daringly call decent. (Certainly compared to my few attempts to import things into Word. At least here everything stays in ASCII!) Given the number of people that I've personally heard say "I would use it if it were 1.0", and recognizing that I have that attitude myself, I think releasing as 1.0 is important right now. Especially since folks have suffered through the pain of a feature freeze and prereleasing for so long. I agree that the somewhat limited textclass selection (at least compared to what can be done) and example/template selection will make LyX 1.0 frustrating to use for some users. (But any college student who wants to write letters and class papers shouldn't have much trouble.) Perhaps we need to retarget 1.0. 1.0 may not take over the world. As you said, we still can't hide ERT. 1.0 should maybe still focus on people who have used LaTeX (e.g. the scientific societies that have LaTeX classes), and Linux users, and other people who are comfortable with actually having to learn a bit about a program. The truth is that while I think 1.0 is great, and all the devvies deserve praise for it, there's just no way it would get into mainstream press, and it *shouldn't* yet, because the mainstream press would all say it's way too hard and noone would try it. Remember, they're just starting to get used to Linux. ERT would drive them crazy. Here's what I would suggest. Release 1.0 now. Then, concurrent with the 1.1 development, begin the "formal effort" you describe of adding many new examples/templates and textclasses, as well as providing up to date docs for it all. Asger brilliantly points out that the folks on the devel list are too polite to fill others' inboxes with "me too" messages. While most of the devvies are (I think) programming in large part because it's fun and an interesting and challenging project, all of us are excited to see the LyX user base growing. And all of us recognize that the user base will grow if we make it easy for new users to join in. It's just that most of us don't have the time to organize that. Which leads to the next problem. Asger suggested uploading your example files, but---while a noble idea---that probably won't lead to everyone else uploading their example files. You may remember (or find in the archive) an extremely brief thread I started called something like "Example files contest" where I suggested that a contest might be a way to get people to send in files. The prize, of course, is that your file gets distributed worldwide. OK, it was a stupid idea. But the point is, the textclass/example effort will go nowhere without a leader. And of course, you're the logical leader, Larry. (1) You care a lot about it. (2) You're not (AFAIK) a code demon. (3) You speak/write English well, which is essential for non-code stuff. (4) Layout file syntax is simple and the texperts on the list will help you with cls stuff. And most importantly (5) you're the one who brought up the problem. Without active leadership, net projects die quickly. Remember the doc project? Other than Mike, who (including me!) has written any docs lately? And yet I could've sworn the idea was to have the docs set up perfectly for v1.0. So. I hope you'll take this historic opportunity (sorry: state of the union address on the brain) to start a textclass/example project. I think there's a lot of good things that would come out of doing this project concurrently with 1.1 development. In addition to being the cleaner kernel version, 1.2 could be the World Domination version. (1) ERT will be hidden in 1.2. Easier to make templates (2) Toolkit independence means we can interface with KDE (and gnome?), which means LyX can be just another application you double click on from your Mac-like desktop. (3) Working concurrently with 1.1 means that devvies who *can't* really contribute much to the T/E effort have something to do, instead of shutting the whole project down. (4) Working concurrently with 1.1 means that you may be able to make specific feature suggestions which can be integrated during the earlier stages of development (e.g., now). Specifically, feature suggestions that will make things easier for new users. Either LyX functions, or new Layout tags, or whatever. The WD release, then, would be the one where we'd pull out all the stops in the PR campaign. Where we would do our best to get even non-Linux media to review LyX or publish the press release. And *that* press release can focus a
typo in lyx.man in pre8
Hi, in lyx.man it says: It is designed for people who wants a professional output with a minimum of time effort,... It should be 'want' instead of 'wants'. Although I'm not a native english speaker the first sentence sounds strange to me: LyX is a modern approach of writing documents... Perhaps we should take the first sentence from ANNOUNCE, where it says "...*provides* a more modern approach to writing documents..." (same for README). But maybe it's perfectly okay, what do the native speakers think? Regards Daniel -- PGP Key fingerprint = 3D 98 9E D2 00 B6 E0 9D 7E B9 77 23 17 E2 11 6A
Re: New PR interim as attachment
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 11:32:05AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: "Martin" == Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anyway, I am rather lost now. So how to continue? 1. Which text to use as basis for further work. Mine, or Larry's? Yours. Larry's can go into an article and/or the World Domination release (see my previous email) That said, I really like his Section description, if there's any way you could include that. I think it's even better than the spaces thing, because when I read the spaces thing, I get an impression of LyX *not letting you* do things. Even if that's true, I think people who have no idea what LyX is will feel that they're being forced to do it. So at the least I would change the language. While LyX presents the user with the familiar face of a WYSIWYG word processor, new users may be taken aback when LyX refuses to do certain things, like entering two successive blanks or inserting an empty line. LyX doesn't because it knows YOU shouldn't. Why not just something like: In LyX, you don't type two spaces after a sentence or an empty line after a section heading; LyX puts extra spacing in by itself Or at least replace the last sentence with "You don't *have* to put in those spaces, because LyX does it for you." (Makes LyX sound friendly and helpful, instead of domineering.) Or just put in Larry's Section description (see also John's section description in chapter one of the tutorial.) The rest of the paragraph is nice, though. 2. Document processor. Yes/no? I see both sides here. I kind of feel like if you are going to use the word, you ought to say "We call it a *document* processor because it looks at the whole document, not just a series of *words*." Except that you can think of a better way to say that. And I don't know which paragraph you'd put that in. Maybe in the WYSIWYM paragraph, tho that's already long. 3. Mention Linux and Open Source. (LyX AND LaTeX) Yes. (But remember, LyX is not ONLY for Linux). As I said in my last e-mail, I don't think we even want to be in the mainstream press right now. Give LyX some time to grow. And I think open source is becoming a bit over-hyped too. Yes, definitely say open source at least once, but don't try to make it the (or even a) main selling point. The main selling point should be that LyX is a good program. 4. Comparison with Word and WP -- hesitant. Alejandro's got a good point. If you want to write a whole article which compares many of their features, fine. I don't think the press release needs it. 5. "No familiarity" disclaimer. OK. How then? I think the problem is just with the language "unless you want to do advanced things" which implies that otherwise you can only do really simple things. Why not just: Using LyX requires no familiarity with LaTeX. However, if you're a LaTeX user, know that LyX offers full LaTeX transparency, can support almost any LaTeX documentclass or package [which is true as long as you're in TeX mode the whole time], and will import and export well-formed LaTeX documents. This (short) paragraph then does two things: reassures the LaTeX-ignorant that they're safe; and tells the LaTeX-aware that they don't have to feel all their latex knowledge is wasted. 6. HELP! "Be careful what you wish for" (Into the Woods) Finally some more minor points. - I would get rid of the second sentence. You say the same thing in the third sentence, and what's drudge? - It's great that you include movie scripts as an example, but don't include it twice (first and third paragraph). - I would get rid of the "freedom is based in law" sentence. A PR is no place for philosophy :) Anyway, I know you're arguing that we need to mention LyX's shortcomings, but I really don't like painting LyX as "restrict"ive. Again, we need to be honest, but I think certain things will turn people off so much they won't realize that restriction is good. Keep up the good work! -Amir
version control
I agree with JMarc. While nice, the version control is basic. It also doesn't work with older versions of RCS (unless Lars fixed it since pre4 or so.) -Amir
Re: version control
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Amir Karger wrote: I agree with JMarc. While nice, the version control is basic. It also doesn't work with older versions of RCS (unless Lars fixed it since pre4 or so.) It would be great if support for PRCS were added... PRCS is a cool interface to RCS (at the moment, will have a better binary diff system in the future) that works like CVS (with a central repository and lots of nice features...) I don't have their URI handy, but I am sure a Linux search on www.google.com will find it... I'd do it myself but I am very time-impaired (besides, I would have to dig into the LyX C++ code for a while to get used to it...) It's really much better than RCS, trust me... Laters, D@ PS- I'll try to download pre8 asap... D@ PPS- just got curious. my server went out for 10 days and i think I may have missed some posts about the emmedded language,... did we finally take a decision? I say it because I have literally stumbled against S-Lang and it looks rather pretty and easy to embed... just curious, not trying to start another round of discussions... :) D@ -- sig who David Suaacute;rez de Lis uri mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] frominstitution University of Santiago de Compostela country SPAIN federation EU /from /sig
Re: New PR interim as attachment
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:58:26PM -0500, Amir Karger wrote: On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 11:32:05AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: 3. Mention Linux and Open Source. (LyX AND LaTeX) Yes. (But remember, LyX is not ONLY for Linux). I'm a FreeBSD user, and haven't had a Linux partition for two years. Nevertheless, I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to give "Linux" and "open source" front billing, purely for marketing reasons. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lyx-1.0.0pre8 problems (2 make problems, 1 bug still there :-()
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: JML "Fred" == Fred Hucht [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Fred Hi LyXers, the following problems are (partly still) in LyX pl8: Fred Making: --- Fred 1) Using CC=xlc CXX=xlC CFLAGS=-O CXXFLAGS=-O ./configure Fred --program-suffix=-1.0.0pl8 and make, I get, after make made Fred libintl.a: make: 1254-002 Cannot find a rule to create target Fred lyx-1.0.0pl8.pot from dependencies. Temp fix: I copied lyx.pot Fred to lyx-1.0.0pl8.pot JML This problem does not arise with GNU make and I If you can find a JML modifications of the rules in po/Makefile that fix that, I can put JML that in. You might try to change: JML JML $(srcdir)/cat-id-tbl.c: $(srcdir)/stamp-cat-id; @: JML $(srcdir)/stamp-cat-id: $(PACKAGE).pot JML JML to JML JML $(srcdir)/cat-id-tbl.c: $(srcdir)/stamp-cat-id; @: JML $(srcdir)/stamp-cat-id: $(srcdir)/$(PACKAGE).pot OK, then it works without problems. Put it in :-) Have fun, Fred Fred Hucht, Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Duisburg, Germany Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.thp.Uni-Duisburg.DE/ "Der Koerper der algebraischen Zahlen ist kein algebraischer Zahlkoerper" (E. Landau, Zahlentheorie (1927), Satz 718)
pre-1.0 suggestions
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:33:18PM -0500, Amir Karger wrote: I agree that the somewhat limited textclass selection (at least compared to what can be done) and example/template selection will make LyX 1.0 frustrating to use for some users. (But any college student who wants to write letters and class papers shouldn't have much trouble.) Two practical suggestions for 1.0, with new users in mind. (i) We ought to at least offer new users a "template" for a standard blank page which takes the liberty of setting margins of: 1in/1in/1in/1in -- top/bottom/left/right. I remember first using LyX (before Edit-Paper even existed) and needing a *manual* to set these margins. Ouch. (ii) One of the very first questions new users ask is: how can I indent a paragraph? This is another feature that shouldn't require a manual. The current LyX interface is confusing and should be changed. This feature is buried in Edit-Paragraph-ExtOpt. Minipage absolutely belongs where it is. But we've mixed Indentation with Minipage. In fact, if you click "Indentated Paragraph", then you specify the indentation value in the "Width" field, which makes no sense. Width of Minipage -- that makes sense. "Width" of indentation? No one will guess that. We've given vertical spacing elements more prominence than indentation --- on the primary page, not the ExtOpt page. I suggest we put "indented paragraph" check box on the first Edit-Paragraph page, and include an "indent by ___" input box. There *is* an Indent item, with a "No Indent" check box. Kind of reminds me of M$'s "Start-Shutdown". In fact, this is a "don't indent *first line* feature", and should be labeled thus. Summary: When you think about two finger typists using M$ Word, it's fair to say they use standard margins and occasionally indent paragraphs, usually with tabs. We ought to make LyX accessible to these users, and I believe that the above two additions will. I suppose I could suggest that we wire the "tab" key to turn on paragraph indentation, and add a default 1in length for each time you hit "tab". This would be highly functional and consistent with our current interface. (With shift-tab to reverse the process). But I acknowledge it encourages bad habits and runs against the grain. So this suggestion is mentioned but not seriously proposed. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PR woes
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 08:45:32AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Except for table improvments, everything that you mention here was already present in 0.12.0. This does not make sense. Funny. More than half of the people I talk to who say "I tried LyX once but don't use it" in fact tried it pre-0.12.0. The most frequent complaint: "You couldn't even set *margins*". I think it's worth highlighting that LyX now has basic word processing functionality. By the way, I asked three intelligent non-UNIX users today their opinion of what "word processor" means. Each said some variation on: "software that processes words into attractive, easy to read, well formatted documents". LyX *is* a word processor, with advanced typesetting features. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Three pre-versions of PR doc
Here they are: Directory http://www.netby.net/Oest/Europa-Alle/vermeer/ Files LyX-PR_1.txt The oldest. More or less superseded IMHO LyX-PR_2.txt My latest from earlier this week LyX-PR_3.txt A thorough reworking, following up on (and taking large chunks of) Larry Marso's counterproposal. I like both 2 and 3. 3 is more "sales-minded", 2 more down-to-earth suitable perhaps for the LaTeX/Linux/science and engineering set. Perhaps we have use for both. So, as time is running a bit short, I suggest the following: - Which one do you prefer? (why?) - Which "point editings" (i.e. no large reorganizations, but e.g. paragraph switches at most) are needed on that? Next week I will be very busy, so anything large will be a problem to do in time. So, PLEASE try not to diverge the process :-) Martin
fvwm button
Attached is 33x32 7 color .xpm that I use on my fvwm2 button. Maybe others will like it. Feel free to do with it as you will. -- Garst
Re: New PR interim as attachment
Martin Vermeer wrote: "Martin" == Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Martin ... more convenient for some of you. I read it, and I like what I saw, beside some comments from Larry with which I happen to agree (see my answer to him). I think this language Which are those? draws a reasonable line between boring technical description and nonsensical hype. JMarc Anyway, I am rather lost now. So how to continue? 1. Which text to use as basis for further work. Mine, or Larry's? Fill your boots. 2. Document processor. Yes/no? I personally think that Document processor is a must. At the very least, lets try to kill off "wordprocessor" (and all beasts that use the name). Note that the new Xerox printers are DocuTech's (or something like that). LyX's document oriented approach to, well, documents is a life saver (job saver?). 3. Mention Linux and Open Source. (LyX AND LaTeX) Yes. (But remember, LyX is not ONLY for Linux). Any user who can compile a program probably knows what this means. To those who don't know what compile means, it is all a mystery. Are there binaries available for other systems? 4. Comparison with Word and WP -- hesitant. My feeling is too minimalize this. This is on the theory that ANY mention of another product is an advertisement for that product. Think about what you dislike about Word and WP (tabs, WYSIWYG even if you it sucks). AYLI (As You Like It) works better, but you do have to worry about the rare line that won't fit. IMO, and that of many thesis editors I have known, LaTeX (LyX) does the *right thing* instead of putting out an ugly line. It would, however, be nice if LyX could highlight these spots when ViewDvi or ViewPostscript is run. 5. "No familiarity" disclaimer. OK. How then? 6. HELP! Martin I think that the objective should be to get people try LyX and give it enough of a try to make a reasonable decision on what they want to use it for. -- Garst
A LyX presentation - VERY LONG POST (was: RE: LGT thoughts)
Hi folks, yesterday I gave a presentation about LyX at the local Linux User Group. There were over 40 people attending and the whole thing went pretty smooth, I saw only one guy falling asleep and the questions from the audience encouraged me, that people actually understood what the whole thing was about. Now here is what I did in order to prepare: First, all the helpful and interesting discussions about the PR document lead me to the idea to take Martins 2nd draft and turn it into a short presentation using ... KPresenter - No no just kidding - of course I used Lyx and FoilTeX. I made seven slides, the files are attached b.t.w., emphasizing on the various subjects that have been discussed between Larry, Amir, Martin and the rest of us so intensively. The emphasis that I put on things becomes visible from the attached file. I learned one thing yesterday: The audience consisted of about less then 10 percent Latex users, many of whom said, they had tried Latex only occasionally And they said for occasional use it'd be way to complicated so they gave up. I also had to put a lot of emphasis on explaining why it is not possible to type two spaces and get to see two spaces, with other words explaining the WYSIWYM principle. It is the better way of writing, we know it but it was and still is my opinion that we have to offensive about it. Unfortunately users that have never used Latex do not have the same appreciation for all the features LyX provides, they will flat out compare it with the ccommercially available word processing software unless you work out the differences. People I say, let us make a __nice__ letter class, something that really shows some features, a costumized letter head with a postscript figure maybe, list bank connections on the bottom, attachments and so on, I think Rick had already started in that direction. And then lets ask one of the code wizzards to implement just a little more Wysiwym for writing a letter... If it is possible to draw a table, then could one start there and take some of that code to actually draw a letter head ? Same for a slide or foil, could there be a horizontal line where a Foilhead starts ? Or even the Foilhead with \lhead and \rhead ? Man that'd be cool. Or could there be a horizontal line where a newpage is now marked as ERT ? Look at how my slides look in LyX and in gv and you now what I am talking about. Anyway, part two of the presentation was then based on the lgt-0.3. This prooved to be very helpful though it is very easy to get lost in the lgt and switching between the enlarged screenshots and the actual document is quite cumbersome. Also at the most interesting points there is always the temptation to click on something which of course has no effect. That brough me to an idea, is there someone here who knows a little basic Java in order to call the LyX-server from within Netscape ? Is that at all possible ? I have no idea. Then one could have the LGT open, click on something and it would actually happen in LyX. That would be somehow more useful. One would not have to type all the text and could maybe do a little more math magic... The third part was titled Live fun with LyX and was to give the audience opportunity for questions and give me time to show off some of LyX's features live. All with the pre8 version I downloaded yesterday afternnon :-) That went pretty good. Questions were, - postscript support, i.e. pictures and fonts can one replace the document fonts (that are printed) and can one get nicer screen fonts. I was able to answer both questions in principle. - math editor, well actually no one asked so I did that one anyway - Latex import vs. the native LyX format vs. LinuxDoc. Comes to my mind ? How do the KDE people write their documentation ? Is Koffice ready and up for that ? - Word import, yep honestly, this was the third question I got. - spellchecker, everybody liked the spellchecker interface - printing - fax support (Can I really fax a 25 page document ?) - where to get it All in all I got very positive reactions and hope that I've caused a few people to actually give it a try. Thanks to all of you who more or less directly gave me ideas for this presentation. I have attached the LyX file of my talk, it maybe possible to include it into the LyX template collection but then, it has some significant ERT ;-) Roland On 22-Jan-99 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Thanks to one of today's messages mentioning that Steven has put the LGT on his Web site (thanks, Steven!). Now that I've actually had the chance to try it out in real life, the constant reloading of images really bothers me; i.e. I start the page (boy, do we need to get a background in there!) and it takes a while to load (I expected this). If I click on a thumbnail, I get the big image as expected, but then if I click on the "back" button, it reloads all the thumbnails again. Is this behavior observed by anyone
Re: Three pre-versions of PR doc
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 11:01:05PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: LyX-PR_1.txt The oldest. More or less superseded IMHO LyX-PR_2.txt My latest from earlier this week LyX-PR_3.txt A thorough reworking, following up on (and taking large chunks of) Larry Marso's counterproposal. - Which one do you prefer? (why?) It's really hard to say. I actually prefer #2. I see some of my stuff in #3, but it's been rewritten and stitched together in a very different fashion than I suggested -- and I don't think the new components accomplish what they were intended for any more. I guess that's the danger of PR by committee. ;-) What I was trying to do is unpeel an onion, getting the attention of potential new users in the open source community, and helping a reader brand new to LyX understand a few fundamentals. In #s 1, 2 and 3, I just don't get the lead in. It's a difficult question, how you talk about LyX to someone for the first time. I'd certainly never advocate saying "document processor", "structure based approach" and "predefined rule sets", in the first paragraph. Even if these are pet phrases of some LyX developers, they really say nothing to new readers. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Three pre-versions of PR doc
Martin, this third version is excellent !!! Roland On 22-Jan-99 Martin Vermeer wrote: Here they are: Directory http://www.netby.net/Oest/Europa-Alle/vermeer/ Files LyX-PR_1.txt The oldest. More or less superseded IMHO LyX-PR_2.txt My latest from earlier this week LyX-PR_3.txt A thorough reworking, following up on (and taking large chunks of) Larry Marso's counterproposal. I like both 2 and 3. 3 is more "sales-minded", 2 more down-to-earth suitable perhaps for the LaTeX/Linux/science and engineering set. Perhaps we have use for both. So, as time is running a bit short, I suggest the following: - Which one do you prefer? (why?) - Which "point editings" (i.e. no large reorganizations, but e.g. paragraph switches at most) are needed on that? Next week I will be very busy, so anything large will be a problem to do in time. So, PLEASE try not to diverge the process :-) Martin Roland Krause Visiting Research Associate - Center for Computational Mechanics Washington University, Saint Louis Roland Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem compiling spellchecker.C
Dear LyX Developers,
I have encountered a bug when compiling LyX 1.0 PR6 on a HP-UX platform.
Machine: HP 720, HP-UX 9.01
Compiler: gcc 2.8.1
The problem occurs in the file spellchecker.C. The compiler produces the
following error:
gcc -c -g -O2 -fpcc-struct-return -I. -I. -I../images -I/usr/include/X11R5
spellchecker.C
spellchecker.C: In function `void create_ispell_pipe(const class LString
&)':
spellchecker.C:335: passing `fd_set *' as argument 2 of `select(unsigned
int, int *, int *, int *, const timeval *)'
The line in spellchecker.C causing the problem is
retval = select(pipeout[0]+1, , 0, 0, );
"infds" is declared a few lines previously as
fd_set infds;
which is what is causing the problem. I did some digging around, and the
following is the best explanation I could come up with (along with an ugly
hack to fix the problem).
In "sys/time.h", the protoype for the function "select" is:
extern int select(size_t, int *, int *, int *, const struct timeval *);
In "sys/types.h", "fd_set" is defined as
typedef struct fd_set{
fd_mask fds_bits[howmany(FD_SETSIZE, NFDBITS)];
} fd_set;
In the same header, "fd_mask" is defined as
typedef long fd_mask;
On this machine, int and long int both use 4 bytes. So, without having any
idea what it all means, here's my nasty hack to get spellchecker.C to
compile:
I assumed that, since fd_set has only a single member, fds_bits, that this
is the value to be passed as the second argument to the function "select"
So, I modified line 335 of spellchecker.C as follows:
retval = select(pipeout[0]+1, (int *)infds.fds_bits, 0, 0, );
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but this allows LyX to compile, and
run. The spellchecker seems to work okay too.
I hope this helps,
Daragh.
--
Daragh McDonnell,
D.S.P. Research Group,
University College Dublin.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: (+353 1) 706 1964
Re: pre8 configure wont succeed on IRIX-5.3
*Roland Krause writes: | Oh and the most important thing. Although configure stop with an | error, make runs fine and lyx compiles (with a few warnings) | nicely. Runs too... I *think* that xforms 0.88 has the libxpm funcitions included, so linking to libxpm is strictly not needed. Lgb
Re: anon cvs?
*Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes: | You could try: | CVSROOT=:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/lyxsrc/cvsroot rather: CVSROOT=:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/lyxsrc/cvsroot The password is either cvs or lyx. Lgb PS. I think this should work, tell me if not.
Re: New PR interim as attachment
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 12:03:51PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Martin> 1. Which text to use as basis for further work. Mine, or
> Martin> Larry's?
>
> Yours, of course. I think the latest version is pretty good and was
> rather surprised to see Larry qualify it as 'weak'...
Certainly, yours, Martin. But I hope you get lots of additional comments
from other people, take another look at mine, and do some more thinking
about what we're trying to accomplish.
I'm from a school of thought that's definitely *not* mainstream here.
I think LyX is an amazing piece of word processing software, built on
top of a remarkably robust foundation. I've heard some longtime Mac
users talking about OS/X lately ("great interface -- perhaps the best
GUI available -- now on top of an extremely powerful and stable OS"),
and they've captured some of my feelings about what distinguishes LyX from
WordPerfect, M$ Word and their breed.
We have an opportunity to take the open source world by storm. And even
to get major media coverage -- even more than The Gimp ever has. We
could write (pre-release) articles that put LyX systematically alongside
WordPerfect and make the comparison. We could target a press release
and ship it off to all the authors of recent media pieces about open
source and WordPerfect coming to Linux (lexis-nexis: .ns;open source or
Wordperfect w/i 5 linux).
However, I don't think this works as well without a more complete set
of example documents, templates, alternative textclasses, than we have
now.
"Hollywood" is a very nice example of what we ought to have in about
five more categories.
I have two documents -- unfortunately using hacked LaTeX preambles
instead of disciplined textclasses so far -- that could be entitled
"Business Plan" and "Presentation Book".
I've asked the list a couple of times whether there was sufficient interest
in collecting together examples documents, for us to establish an ftp site
where people could post their efforts. There has never been much of a
response, which I suggests my views are atypical.
It's too bad. If I had my druthers, I'd say lock down the code base, then
let's devote two months to taking out all our BEST, most impressive LyX
documents, formats, etc. and create an outstanding set of included files
that will blow the socks off new users. Frankly, I think the current
release strategy is perhaps too rushed, perhaps too timid.
But I'm just one guy, and not a contributer to the LyX code base. Still,
I'm here to speak freely, ready to give and receive criticism, to do
whatever I can to help promote a truly outstanding open source package.
Best regards
--
Larry S. Marso
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New PR interim as attachment
> > "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Martin> ... more convenient for some of you. > > I read it, and I like what I saw, beside some comments from Larry with > which I happen to agree (see my answer to him). I think this language Which are those? > draws a reasonable line between boring technical description and > nonsensical hype. > > JMarc Anyway, I am rather lost now. So how to continue? 1. Which text to use as basis for further work. Mine, or Larry's? 2. Document processor. Yes/no? 3. Mention Linux and Open Source. (LyX AND LaTeX) Yes. (But remember, LyX is not ONLY for Linux). 4. Comparison with Word and WP -- hesitant. 5. "No familiarity" disclaimer. OK. How then? 6. HELP! Martin
Re: lyx-1.0.0pre8 problems (2 make problems, 1 bug still there :
> "Carl" == Carl Ollivier-Gooch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> 2) Lines like [lyx.C:15] FD_form_title *fdui = (FD_form_title *) >> fl_calloc(1, sizeof(*fdui)); gives the warning from AIX's xlC >> "lyx.C", line 15.64: 1540-101: (W) "fdui" may be used before being >> set. Carl> This should be Carl> FD_form_title *fdui = (FD_form_title *) fl_calloc(1, Carl> sizeof(FD_form_title)); Carl> to keep xLC (and other equally picky compilers) from Carl> complaining. As Jean-Marc said, xforms does this automatically. Carl> I'm attaching a new version of fdfix.sh that uses sed Carl> (awkwardly, I think) to make this change. The patch for this Carl> one would be nearly as long as the file, including the comments Carl> I added about the cryptic sed commands that I added. It seems to me then the following simpler sed rule works equally well: -e 's/\(\(FD_[^ ]*\) \*fdui.*\)sizeof(\*fdui)/\1sizeof(\2)/' If you do not have any objection, I'll use that. Thanks also for the other patch. I'll add the #if 0 version, so that we can decide later to remove everything. JMarc
Re: 1.0.0pre8 problem
> "Reuben" == Reuben Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Reuben> I had just started entering some LaTeX text, and had entered
Reuben> "\conc{}" then went back to just after the open bracket and
Reuben> starting typing "autoconf" when LyX vanished (just after it
Reuben> got to the "c"). I presume it segfaulted, but since I started
Reuben> it directly from a window manager menu, I can't tell. The
Reuben> emergency save worked flawlessly, though.
Reuben> I've not had any stability problems with the 1.0.0pre7
Reuben> snapshot that was made available.
Reuben> Sorry I can't be more specific about the problem.
Please tell us if you find out more info (or a way to reproduce that).
JMarc
Re: lyx-server-question
> "Sven" == Sven Gustke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Sven> Hi out there! I´m working with the lyx-server very well. It is Sven> a wonderfull thing. But the only thing I can´t do (possibly Sven> that´s my fault!? ) is "open a file". The only thing I can do is Sven> to open the dialog . There is no parameter for the Sven> file name. So, what can I do? Thank you! That's something I've been wanting to do for some time: change functions that query interactively for arguments (to insert insets, open files...) so that they can take an argument and use that directly. This is of course an 1.1 job (for example, we could implement the MRU list of the File menu with a 'menu-open foo'), but the menu-open part is so important for scripts that I think we should do it now. So, I'll add that in 1.0.1. JMarc
Re: WYSIWYM printing
> "Reuben" == Reuben Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Reuben> As well as (or perhaps instead of) specifying page ranges, it Reuben> should be possible to give section ranges. This would indeed be a nice thing, and could be controled completely from inside LyX. But I think there should be some kind of interface aroud that, and it will take time to gt right (i.e. intuitive). JMarc
Re: Bug report 1.0.0pre6
> "Alejandro" == Alejandro Aguilar Sierra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Alejandro> On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> Do you want me to commit your previous patch? Would you be >> interested in UMR:s from purify concerning w? (I think I have seen >> some) Alejandro> Did it work for you? If that's the case please do it. No, it didn't do anything for me. However, if it is a resonable cleanup, I'll commit it. Alejandro> Yes, please. I'll try to hunt for more UMR:s, then. JMarc
Re: New PR interim as attachment
> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Martin> ... more convenient for some of you. I read it, and I like what I saw, beside some comments from Larry with which I happen to agree (see my answer to him). I think this language draws a reasonable line between boring technical description and nonsensical hype. JMarc
Re: PR woes
> "Larry" == Larry S Marso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Larry> Reviewing the draft PR earlier this week, I felt it was weak, Larry> pitched the wrong tune and would sail past most everyone Larry> unfamiliar with LyX or at least LaTeX. Larry> I was so concerned that I wrote a virtual alternative. Larry> Seeing the latest redraft, frankly I think we've made very Larry> little progress. I'll try making my points in "critique" form. I see you are very appreciative of Martin's work... Although some of your critics are valid, I think your are being a bit unfair here. Larry> (i) "Document processor" is an utterly meaningless term. OK, let's give it a meaning. LyX is a document processor. If you process only words, you can't have a concept of section of references. If you process a document, you can. Isn't that what you explain later? Larry> (ii) Absolutely say "open source" -- and often. Also with the Larry> first reference to LaTeX. Right. Larry> I suggest: >> Compared to WordPerfect or Microsoft Word, LyX automates the >> structure, layout and formatting of your documents according to >> pre-set rules for different types -- e.g., letters, articles, >> books, even Hollywood scripts -- selected using an easy, point and >> click interface. Lyx produces high quality, professionally typeset >> output, freeing the user to concentrate on *writing*. Right. (see above) Larry> The current language often sounds like a press release for Larry> Thot. (Raise you hand if you've heard of Thot). Grmph. If you ever had the curiosity to have a look at my e-mail address and run thot, you would have known the answer. Unfortunately, I have not yet found the key sequence to raise my hand in a message. Larry> (v) LyX is fully functional groupware. Mention it! I suggest: >> LyX also offers sophisticated version control features, for group >> collaboration on complex documents. Hmm, are the version control features 'sophisticated'? I have to admit I did not use the version control features, but I'd describe them as basic. Were they sophisticated, I'd expect to have a way to see revisions to a text. Larry> (vi) Get into the message, relatively early, that LyX has added Larry> a number of things in the last twelve-eighteen months that were Larry> lacking before. I bump into lots of people who tried LyX back Larry> before it had any of the features I describe in the suggestions Larry> below, and don't realize it's evolved: >> The LyX interface offers the familiar look and feel of a WYSIWYG >> graphical user interface word processor. In addition to several >> pre-set standard document formats, this release 1.0.0 of LyX offers >> the user extensive control over fonts, margins, headers/footers, >> spacing, "bullet/dash" symbols used for multi-level outlines, the >> structure and appearance of complex tables, even the use of color >> characters. Except for table improvments, everything that you mention here was already present in 0.12.0. This does not make sense. >> If you frequently use mathematical formulas or notation, *drop >> everything* and try LyX today. The math panel interface, for >> point-and-click creation of complex mathematical statements, and >> superlative typeset output is easily best-of-breed. Larry> OK. Too strong. Maybe say "If you frequently use ... you Larry> simply *must* try LyX." And what about superlative typeset output? Larry> (viii) Still, we need some language to convey how LyX works, Larry> what makes it different. WYSIWYM alone doesn't cut it. I Larry> suggested: >> You set the ground rules, leaving the finer points of document >> layout to LyX's highly advanced, intelligent rendering engine. >> Think of LyX as the first "WYSIWYM" word processor: What You See Is >> What You MEAN. You tell LyX how to treat particular words and >> lines in your document: e.g., this is standard text, this is a >> Section title, this is a footnote, this is a caption beneath an >> inserted graphic. As you make your selections, the WYSIWYM >> interface gives you clean, straightforward "visual clues" >> (actually, very WYSIWYG-like). LaTeX then processes your document >> into professionally typseset output, which can be quickly viewed >> and updated with xdvi or ghostview. OK. >> New users will be astonished by certain basic LyX features. For >> example, hitting the space bar repeatedly, it is *impossible* to >> enter more than one space between words. That's because LaTeX >> figures out spacing for you, intelligently. Let's say that you >> tell LyX a certain line is a Section title. LaTeX takes care of >> adding the Section to your table of contents, placing the Section >> name into your header (where appropriate), starting a new page, >> assigning the Section a number or label, formating its appearance >> on the page, and telling other parts of your document what page >> it's on (for references). Many of the headaches associated with >> word processing simply vanish. I think
Re: pre8 configure wont succeed on IRIX-5.3
Hello,
I'm not sure what happens, but it looks weird. From the relevant
snippet of config.log appended to this message, it seems that some
objects in your libXpm library (CrBufFrI.o) are broken. Since
configure relies on one of these broken objects to detect the library,
the test fails. Fortunately, the .o files needed to link LyX are *not*
broken.
I thik I can't do much about it. You should re-build your library.
JMarc
configure:2700: checking for XpmCreateBufferFromImage in -lXpm
configure:2722: g++ -o conftest -g -O2-L/usr/local/lib conftest.C -lXpm -l
SM -lICE -liberty -lc -lm -lX11 1>&5
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
/usr/bin/../lib/ld:
Object file format error in: /usr/local/lib/libXpm.a(CrBufFrI.o): bad symbolic he
ader (magic number)
configure: failed program was:
#line 2708 "configure"
#include "confdefs.h"
/* Override any gcc2 internal prototype to avoid an error. */
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C"
#endif
/* We use char because int might match the return type of a gcc2
builtin and then its argument prototype would still apply. */
char XpmCreateBufferFromImage();
int main() {
XpmCreateBufferFromImage()
; return 0; }
co
Re: New PR interim as attachment
> I've asked the list a couple of times whether there was sufficient interest > in collecting together examples documents, for us to establish an ftp site > where people could post their efforts. There has never been much of a > response, which I suggests my views are atypical. This is a great idea, and I think everybody agrees on this. (If nobody answers, that often means that people agree, or alternatively don't know what are you talking about. In this case, I think it's the former. But on a mailing list, it feels strange to hit the reply button and write "yeah, me too", because you don't want to hurt the signal/noise ration with such mails.) But nobody has volunteered to coordinate it, so nothing has happened. I suggest that you start by uploading your documents to ftp.lyx.org, and announce it on this list. Then people can have a look at it, and when enough documents have surfaces, something more formal could be done about it. Greets, Asger P.S. Regarding the LGT, Steven (of NT port fame) has put it on his web-site: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~steven/lgt/lgt-0.3.html P.P.S. Since la1ad is not going to have PHP upgraded, I'm not sure what to do about the web site... I'll have time on Tuesday, take a shower, and then we'll see.
Re: New PR interim as attachment
The question most interesting to me is whether there is interest in treating the 1.0 release as a major breakpoint, a time to attract (and assist) new users for the LyX platform. A formal effort would certainly require a period of time set aside to the task of preparing new accompanying material (particularly templates and document classes) in a disciplined fashion, and probably for the effort to become the dominent "development" effort for six to eight weeks. Documentation seems very well developed, but other basics that would enable users to become "immediately more productive" haven't received any emphasis at all. We have a foundation in place to go way beyond the simple packages that come bundled with LaTeX, the intriguing Hollywood showing us the way. Going out brightly into the open source world offering "Article, Report, Book, (the badly broken) Letter" will befuddle new users. What's the point of calling this a 1.0 release? I've spoken here often of LyX being "so close to greatness I can taste it". OK, we can't hide ERT for awhile. But I don't see why we don't set aside a little time to add a few more Hollywoods to the list. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 05:01:06PM +0100, Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen wrote: > > I've asked the list a couple of times whether there was sufficient interest > > in collecting together examples documents, for us to establish an ftp site > > where people could post their efforts. There has never been much of a > > response, which I suggests my views are atypical. > > This is a great idea, and I think everybody agrees on this. (If > nobody answers, that often means that people agree, or alternatively > don't know what are you talking about. In this case, I think it's the > former. But on a mailing list, it feels strange to hit the reply button > and write "yeah, me too", because you don't want to hurt the signal/noise > ration with such mails.) > > But nobody has volunteered to coordinate it, so nothing > has happened. I suggest that you start by uploading your > documents to ftp.lyx.org, and announce it on this list. > > Then people can have a look at it, and when enough documents > have surfaces, something more formal could be done about it. > > Greets, > > Asger > P.S. Regarding the LGT, Steven (of NT port fame) has put > it on his web-site: > > http://www.cs.uu.nl/~steven/lgt/lgt-0.3.html > > P.P.S. Since la1ad is not going to have PHP upgraded, I'm not > sure what to do about the web site... I'll have time > on Tuesday, take a shower, and then we'll see.
Re: New PR interim as attachment
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 21:33:31 +0200 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > The question most interesting to me is whether there is interest in > treating the 1.0 release as a major breakpoint, a time to attract (and > assist) new users for the LyX platform. > > A formal effort would certainly require a period of time set aside to > the task of preparing new accompanying material (particularly templates and > document classes) in a disciplined fashion, and probably for the effort > to become the dominent "development" effort for six to eight weeks. > > Documentation seems very well developed, but other basics that would > enable users to become "immediately more productive" haven't received > any emphasis at all. We have a foundation in place to go way beyond > the simple packages that come bundled with LaTeX, the intriguing Hollywood > showing us the way. > > Going out brightly into the open source world offering "Article, Report, > Book, (the badly broken) Letter" will befuddle new users. What's the > point of calling this a 1.0 release? There is something in this, really. Right now, it seems that our institute is going to standardize on some format for its reports and publications. Somehow, I have to be able to produce this format. Of course LyX/LaTeX can do that, but it either requires writing a new .cls and .layout file (based on Article, I assume) which doesn't attract me, or kludging. And even if I managed this, many more out there would never manage it. What we need really is not so much NUMERICALLY more classes and layouts, but ways to tailor the ones we have in many small ways. Like the "geometry" package does already for the margins and the Allan Rae thing for bullet list symbols. But similar things for section header formats, numbering, etc. etc. We have been making progress, but more is needed. So that simple people are not lost in the situation I am in. Currently I got article.cls patched (into fgiart.cls) but I am lost as to how to change the bibliography layout. I got rid of the item numbers (which I wanted) but not the [] symbols around them. Any ideas? Martin
Re: pre8 configure wont succeed on IRIX-5.3
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 06:11:09PM -0600, Roland Krause wrote: > Trying to build lyx-1.0.0-pre8 on my IRIX-5.3... > When running configure it stops with > > pocus > ./configure --with-extra-includes=/usr/local/include > --with-extra-lib=/usr/local/lib > > ...chugging away for a while > > ** Can't find libXpm. Please check that the Xpm library >is correctly installed on your system. > > of course libXpm is installed > > pocus > ls -l /usr/local/lib/libXpm.a > -rw-rw-r--1 rokrau admin 101396 Sep 14 14:26 /usr/local/lib/libXpm.a > > The version is: > pocus: > ls -l /usr/local/src/*xpm* > -r--rw-r--1 rokrau admin 475621 Apr 16 1998 > /usr/local/src/xpm-3.4k-irix.tgz > I'm not sure what version I've got, but I think it's 3.4g or so. I haven't bothered keeping it up to date. Anyway, it works just fine on IRIX 6.2, so I don't think it's an IRIX issue. Which is to say, it may be an IRIX issue, but it's probably that 3.4k doesn't work, not that libXpm is screwed up in general on IRIX. -Amir
Re: WYSIWYM printing
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 08:53:15AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Reuben" == Reuben Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Reuben> As well as (or perhaps instead of) specifying page ranges, it > Reuben> should be possible to give section ranges. > > This would indeed be a nice thing, and could be controled completely > from inside LyX. But I think there should be some kind of interface > aroud that, and it will take time to gt right (i.e. intuitive). This is a great idea, and much more WYSIWYM, as Reuben suggested in the subject line. I'm imagining a table of contents popup, where you could highlight the (contiguous?) sections you want to print. As long as we're doing that, why not take it a step further. Using the TOC or some other method, allow the user to select portions of the document and do various operations. Spellcheck, Save as, Export (harder. Bug prone?) are just a few ideas. -Amir
Re: WYSIWYM printing
amir added, > As long as we're doing that, why not take it a step further. Using the TOC > or some other method, allow the user to select portions of the document and > do various operations. Spellcheck, Save as, Export (harder. Bug prone?) are > just a few ideas. Wouldn't being able to do this for export be requried in order to do it for printing? rick --
Re: New PR interim as attachment
In general I agree with Jean Marc, except: > Martin> 4. Comparison with Word and WP -- hesitant. > > I am hesitant about the principle, but the paragraph is > interesting. You could change the beginning to ``Compared to classical > Word Processors like WordPerfect or Microsoft Word,...''. If you mention those wps you have to give more details to compare, as Larry suggested. Just describing them as "classical wps" is not fair. As I said already, that goes better in a review article. IMO don't mention them at all. > - add the bit about WP and Word (if it does not take too much precious > space). This supports my opinion against mentioning them. Why to waste valuable space? I insist in that the PR should be as short as possible. Greets, Alejandro
Re: WYSIWYM printing
Commands affecting portions of your text keyed off LyX's understanding of sections, subsections, etc.? *Very* cool. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 12:59:31PM -0500, Amir Karger wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 08:53:15AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > "Reuben" == Reuben Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Reuben> As well as (or perhaps instead of) specifying page ranges, it > > Reuben> should be possible to give section ranges. > > > > This would indeed be a nice thing, and could be controled completely > > from inside LyX. But I think there should be some kind of interface > > aroud that, and it will take time to gt right (i.e. intuitive). > > This is a great idea, and much more WYSIWYM, as Reuben suggested in the > subject line. I'm imagining a table of contents popup, where you could > highlight the (contiguous?) sections you want to print. > > As long as we're doing that, why not take it a step further. Using the TOC > or some other method, allow the user to select portions of the document and > do various operations. Spellcheck, Save as, Export (harder. Bug prone?) are > just a few ideas. > > -Amir >
Re: New PR interim as attachment
Larry, you've made some very good points. Most of the folks on the devel list have been using LyX for a long time, and it's hard for us to look at it from the perspective of new users, especially ones who don't even know LaTeX. That said, I think it's too late to stop 1.0. The LyXers have been saying for a long time that all LyX really needed was decent LaTeX import and it could be released as 1.0. Thanks to the work of a few brilliant programmers (it's friday!) we've now got LaTeX import which I'll daringly call decent. (Certainly compared to my few attempts to import things into Word. At least here everything stays in ASCII!) Given the number of people that I've personally heard say "I would use it if it were 1.0", and recognizing that I have that attitude myself, I think releasing as 1.0 is important right now. Especially since folks have suffered through the pain of a feature freeze and prereleasing for so long. I agree that the somewhat limited textclass selection (at least compared to what can be done) and example/template selection will make LyX 1.0 frustrating to use for some users. (But any college student who wants to write letters and class papers shouldn't have much trouble.) Perhaps we need to retarget 1.0. 1.0 may not take over the world. As you said, we still can't hide ERT. 1.0 should maybe still focus on people who have used LaTeX (e.g. the scientific societies that have LaTeX classes), and Linux users, and other people who are comfortable with actually having to learn a bit about a program. The truth is that while I think 1.0 is great, and all the devvies deserve praise for it, there's just no way it would get into mainstream press, and it *shouldn't* yet, because the mainstream press would all say it's way too hard and noone would try it. Remember, they're just starting to get used to Linux. ERT would drive them crazy. Here's what I would suggest. Release 1.0 now. Then, concurrent with the 1.1 development, begin the "formal effort" you describe of adding many new examples/templates and textclasses, as well as providing up to date docs for it all. Asger brilliantly points out that the folks on the devel list are too polite to fill others' inboxes with "me too" messages. While most of the devvies are (I think) programming in large part because it's fun and an interesting and challenging project, all of us are excited to see the LyX user base growing. And all of us recognize that the user base will grow if we make it easy for new users to join in. It's just that most of us don't have the time to organize that. Which leads to the next problem. Asger suggested uploading your example files, but---while a noble idea---that probably won't lead to everyone else uploading their example files. You may remember (or find in the archive) an extremely brief thread I started called something like "Example files contest" where I suggested that a contest might be a way to get people to send in files. The prize, of course, is that your file gets distributed worldwide. OK, it was a stupid idea. But the point is, the textclass/example effort will go nowhere without a leader. And of course, you're the logical leader, Larry. (1) You care a lot about it. (2) You're not (AFAIK) a code demon. (3) You speak/write English well, which is essential for non-code stuff. (4) Layout file syntax is simple and the texperts on the list will help you with cls stuff. And most importantly (5) you're the one who brought up the problem. Without active leadership, net projects die quickly. Remember the doc project? Other than Mike, who (including me!) has written any docs lately? And yet I could've sworn the idea was to have the docs set up perfectly for v1.0. So. I hope you'll take this historic opportunity (sorry: state of the union address on the brain) to start a textclass/example project. I think there's a lot of good things that would come out of doing this project concurrently with 1.1 development. In addition to being the cleaner kernel version, 1.2 could be the World Domination version. (1) ERT will be hidden in 1.2. Easier to make templates (2) Toolkit independence means we can interface with KDE (and gnome?), which means LyX can be just another application you double click on from your Mac-like desktop. (3) Working concurrently with 1.1 means that devvies who *can't* really contribute much to the T/E effort have something to do, instead of shutting the whole project down. (4) Working concurrently with 1.1 means that you may be able to make specific feature suggestions which can be integrated during the earlier stages of development (e.g., now). Specifically, feature suggestions that will make things easier for new users. Either LyX functions, or new Layout tags, or whatever. The WD release, then, would be the one where we'd pull out all the stops in the PR campaign. Where we would do our best to get even non-Linux media to review LyX or publish the press release. And *that* press release can focus a
typo in lyx.man in pre8
Hi, in lyx.man it says: It is designed for people who wants a professional output with a minimum of time effort,... It should be 'want' instead of 'wants'. Although I'm not a native english speaker the first sentence sounds strange to me: LyX is a modern approach of writing documents... Perhaps we should take the first sentence from ANNOUNCE, where it says "...*provides* a more modern approach to writing documents..." (same for README). But maybe it's perfectly okay, what do the native speakers think? Regards Daniel -- PGP Key fingerprint = 3D 98 9E D2 00 B6 E0 9D 7E B9 77 23 17 E2 11 6A
Re: New PR interim as attachment
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 11:32:05AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: > > > "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Anyway, I am rather lost now. So how to continue? > > 1. Which text to use as basis for further work. Mine, or Larry's? Yours. Larry's can go into an article and/or the World Domination release (see my previous email) That said, I really like his Section description, if there's any way you could include that. I think it's even better than the spaces thing, because when I read the spaces thing, I get an impression of LyX *not letting you* do things. Even if that's true, I think people who have no idea what LyX is will feel that they're being forced to do it. So at the least I would change the language. > While LyX presents the user with the familiar face of a WYSIWYG word > processor, new users may be taken aback when LyX refuses to do certain > things, like entering two successive blanks or inserting an empty line. > LyX doesn't because it knows YOU shouldn't. Why not just something like: In LyX, you don't type two spaces after a sentence or an empty line after a section heading; LyX puts extra spacing in by itself Or at least replace the last sentence with "You don't *have* to put in those spaces, because LyX does it for you." (Makes LyX sound friendly and helpful, instead of domineering.) Or just put in Larry's Section description (see also John's section description in chapter one of the tutorial.) The rest of the paragraph is nice, though. > 2. Document processor. Yes/no? I see both sides here. I kind of feel like if you are going to use the word, you ought to say "We call it a *document* processor because it looks at the whole document, not just a series of *words*." Except that you can think of a better way to say that. And I don't know which paragraph you'd put that in. Maybe in the WYSIWYM paragraph, tho that's already long. > 3. Mention Linux and Open Source. (LyX AND LaTeX) Yes. (But remember, > LyX is not ONLY for Linux). As I said in my last e-mail, I don't think we even want to be in the mainstream press right now. Give LyX some time to grow. And I think open source is becoming a bit over-hyped too. Yes, definitely say open source at least once, but don't try to make it the (or even a) main selling point. The main selling point should be that LyX is a good program. > 4. Comparison with Word and WP -- hesitant. Alejandro's got a good point. If you want to write a whole article which compares many of their features, fine. I don't think the press release needs it. > 5. "No familiarity" disclaimer. OK. How then? I think the problem is just with the language "unless you want to do advanced things" which implies that otherwise you can only do really simple things. Why not just: Using LyX requires no familiarity with LaTeX. However, if you're a LaTeX user, know that LyX offers full LaTeX transparency, can support almost any LaTeX documentclass or package [which is true as long as you're in TeX mode the whole time], and will import and export well-formed LaTeX documents. This (short) paragraph then does two things: reassures the LaTeX-ignorant that they're safe; and tells the LaTeX-aware that they don't have to feel all their latex knowledge is wasted. > 6. HELP! "Be careful what you wish for" (Into the Woods) Finally some more minor points. - I would get rid of the second sentence. You say the same thing in the third sentence, and what's drudge? - It's great that you include movie scripts as an example, but don't include it twice (first and third paragraph). - I would get rid of the "freedom is based in law" sentence. A PR is no place for philosophy :) Anyway, I know you're arguing that we need to mention LyX's shortcomings, but I really don't like painting LyX as "restrict"ive. Again, we need to be honest, but I think certain things will turn people off so much they won't realize that restriction is good. Keep up the good work! -Amir
version control
I agree with JMarc. While nice, the version control is basic. It also doesn't work with older versions of RCS (unless Lars fixed it since pre4 or so.) -Amir
Re: version control
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Amir Karger wrote: > I agree with JMarc. While nice, the version control is basic. It also > doesn't work with older versions of RCS (unless Lars fixed it since pre4 or > so.) It would be great if support for PRCS were added... PRCS is a cool interface to RCS (at the moment, will have a better binary diff system in the future) that works like CVS (with a central repository and lots of nice features...) I don't have their URI handy, but I am sure a Linux search on www.google.com will find it... I'd do it myself but I am very time-impaired (besides, I would have to dig into the LyX C++ code for a while to get used to it...) It's really much better than RCS, trust me... Laters, D@ PS- I'll try to download pre8 asap... D@ PPS- just got curious. my server went out for 10 days and i think I may have missed some posts about the emmedded language,... did we finally take a decision? I say it because I have literally stumbled against S-Lang and it looks rather pretty and easy to embed... just curious, not trying to start another round of discussions... :) D@ -- David Surez de Lis mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] University of Santiago de Compostela SPAIN EU
Re: New PR interim as attachment
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:58:26PM -0500, Amir Karger wrote: > On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 11:32:05AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: > > > 3. Mention Linux and Open Source. (LyX AND LaTeX) Yes. (But remember, > > LyX is not ONLY for Linux). I'm a FreeBSD user, and haven't had a Linux partition for two years. Nevertheless, I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to give "Linux" and "open source" front billing, purely for marketing reasons. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lyx-1.0.0pre8 problems (2 make problems, 1 bug still there :-()
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: JML> > "Fred" == Fred Hucht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Fred> Hi LyXers, the following problems are (partly still) in LyX pl8: Fred> Making: --- Fred> 1) Using CC=xlc CXX=xlC CFLAGS=-O CXXFLAGS=-O ./configure Fred> --program-suffix=-1.0.0pl8 and make, I get, after make made Fred> libintl.a: make: 1254-002 Cannot find a rule to create target Fred> lyx-1.0.0pl8.pot from dependencies. Temp fix: I copied lyx.pot Fred> to lyx-1.0.0pl8.pot JML> This problem does not arise with GNU make and I If you can find a JML> modifications of the rules in po/Makefile that fix that, I can put JML> that in. You might try to change: JML> JML> $(srcdir)/cat-id-tbl.c: $(srcdir)/stamp-cat-id; @: JML> $(srcdir)/stamp-cat-id: $(PACKAGE).pot JML> JML> to JML> JML> $(srcdir)/cat-id-tbl.c: $(srcdir)/stamp-cat-id; @: JML> $(srcdir)/stamp-cat-id: $(srcdir)/$(PACKAGE).pot OK, then it works without problems. Put it in :-) Have fun, Fred Fred Hucht, Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Duisburg, Germany Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.thp.Uni-Duisburg.DE/ "Der Koerper der algebraischen Zahlen ist kein algebraischer Zahlkoerper" (E. Landau, Zahlentheorie (1927), Satz 718)
pre-1.0 suggestions
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:33:18PM -0500, Amir Karger wrote: > I agree that the somewhat limited textclass selection (at least compared to > what can be done) and example/template selection will make LyX 1.0 > frustrating to use for some users. (But any college student who wants to > write letters and class papers shouldn't have much trouble.) Two practical suggestions for 1.0, with new users in mind. (i) We ought to at least offer new users a "template" for a standard blank page which takes the liberty of setting margins of: 1in/1in/1in/1in -- top/bottom/left/right. I remember first using LyX (before Edit->Paper even existed) and needing a *manual* to set these margins. Ouch. (ii) One of the very first questions new users ask is: how can I indent a paragraph? This is another feature that shouldn't require a manual. The current LyX interface is confusing and should be changed. This feature is buried in Edit->Paragraph->ExtOpt. Minipage absolutely belongs where it is. But we've mixed Indentation with Minipage. In fact, if you click "Indentated Paragraph", then you specify the indentation value in the "Width" field, which makes no sense. Width of Minipage -- that makes sense. "Width" of indentation? No one will guess that. We've given vertical spacing elements more prominence than indentation --- on the primary page, not the ExtOpt page. I suggest we put "indented paragraph" check box on the first Edit->Paragraph page, and include an "indent by ___" input box. There *is* an Indent item, with a "No Indent" check box. Kind of reminds me of M$'s "Start->Shutdown". In fact, this is a "don't indent *first line* feature", and should be labeled thus. Summary: When you think about two finger typists using M$ Word, it's fair to say they use standard margins and occasionally indent paragraphs, usually with tabs. We ought to make LyX accessible to these users, and I believe that the above two additions will. I suppose I could suggest that we wire the "tab" key to turn on paragraph indentation, and add a default 1in length for each time you hit "tab". This would be highly functional and consistent with our current interface. (With shift-tab to reverse the process). But I acknowledge it encourages bad habits and runs against the grain. So this suggestion is mentioned but not seriously proposed. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PR woes
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 08:45:32AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > Except for table improvments, everything that you mention here was > already present in 0.12.0. This does not make sense. Funny. More than half of the people I talk to who say "I tried LyX once but don't use it" in fact tried it pre-0.12.0. The most frequent complaint: "You couldn't even set *margins*". I think it's worth highlighting that LyX now has basic word processing functionality. By the way, I asked three intelligent non-UNIX users today their opinion of what "word processor" means. Each said some variation on: "software that processes words into attractive, easy to read, well formatted documents". LyX *is* a word processor, with advanced typesetting features. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Three pre-versions of PR doc
Here they are: Directory http://www.netby.net/Oest/Europa-Alle/vermeer/ Files LyX-PR_1.txt The oldest. More or less superseded IMHO LyX-PR_2.txt My latest from earlier this week LyX-PR_3.txt A thorough reworking, following up on (and taking large chunks of) Larry Marso's counterproposal. I like both 2 and 3. 3 is more "sales-minded", 2 more down-to-earth suitable perhaps for the LaTeX/Linux/science and engineering set. Perhaps we have use for both. So, as time is running a bit short, I suggest the following: - Which one do you prefer? (why?) - Which "point editings" (i.e. no large reorganizations, but e.g. paragraph switches at most) are needed on that? Next week I will be very busy, so anything large will be a problem to do in time. So, PLEASE try not to diverge the process :-) Martin
fvwm button
Attached is 33x32 7 color .xpm that I use on my fvwm2 button. Maybe others will like it. Feel free to do with it as you will. -- Garst
Re: New PR interim as attachment
Martin Vermeer wrote: > > > > "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Martin> ... more convenient for some of you. > > > > I read it, and I like what I saw, beside some comments from Larry with > > which I happen to agree (see my answer to him). I think this language > > Which are those? > > > draws a reasonable line between boring technical description and > > nonsensical hype. > > > > JMarc > > Anyway, I am rather lost now. So how to continue? > > 1. Which text to use as basis for further work. Mine, or Larry's? Fill your boots. > 2. Document processor. Yes/no? I personally think that Document processor is a must. At the very least, lets try to kill off "wordprocessor" (and all beasts that use the name). Note that the new Xerox printers are DocuTech's (or something like that). LyX's document oriented approach to, well, documents is a life saver (job saver?). > 3. Mention Linux and Open Source. (LyX AND LaTeX) Yes. (But remember, > LyX is not ONLY for Linux). Any user who can compile a program probably knows what this means. To those who don't know what compile means, it is all a mystery. Are there binaries available for other systems? > 4. Comparison with Word and WP -- hesitant. My feeling is too minimalize this. This is on the theory that ANY mention of another product is an advertisement for that product. Think about what you dislike about Word and WP (tabs, WYSIWYG even if you it sucks). AYLI (As You Like It) works better, but you do have to worry about the rare line that won't fit. IMO, and that of many thesis editors I have known, LaTeX (LyX) does the *right thing* instead of putting out an ugly line. It would, however, be nice if LyX could highlight these spots when ViewDvi or ViewPostscript is run. > 5. "No familiarity" disclaimer. OK. How then? > > 6. HELP! > > Martin I think that the objective should be to get people try LyX and give it enough of a try to make a reasonable decision on what they want to use it for. -- Garst
A LyX presentation - VERY LONG POST (was: RE: LGT thoughts)
Hi folks, yesterday I gave a presentation about LyX at the local Linux User Group. There were over 40 people attending and the whole thing went pretty smooth, I saw only one guy falling asleep and the questions from the audience encouraged me, that people actually understood what the whole thing was about. Now here is what I did in order to prepare: First, all the helpful and interesting discussions about the PR document lead me to the idea to take Martins 2nd draft and turn it into a short presentation using ... KPresenter - No no just kidding - of course I used Lyx and FoilTeX. I made seven slides, the files are attached b.t.w., emphasizing on the various subjects that have been discussed between Larry, Amir, Martin and the rest of us so intensively. The emphasis that I put on things becomes visible from the attached file. I learned one thing yesterday: The audience consisted of about less then 10 percent Latex users, many of whom said, they had tried Latex only occasionally And they said for occasional use it'd be way to complicated so they gave up. I also had to put a lot of emphasis on explaining why it is not possible to type two spaces and get to see two spaces, with other words explaining the WYSIWYM principle. It is the better way of writing, we know it but it was and still is my opinion that we have to offensive about it. Unfortunately users that have never used Latex do not have the same appreciation for all the features LyX provides, they will flat out compare it with the ccommercially available word processing software unless you work out the differences. People I say, let us make a __nice__ letter class, something that really shows some features, a costumized letter head with a postscript figure maybe, list bank connections on the bottom, attachments and so on, I think Rick had already started in that direction. And then lets ask one of the code wizzards to implement just a little more Wysiwym for writing a letter... If it is possible to draw a table, then could one start there and take some of that code to actually draw a letter head ? Same for a slide or foil, could there be a horizontal line where a Foilhead starts ? Or even the Foilhead with \lhead and \rhead ? Man that'd be cool. Or could there be a horizontal line where a newpage is now marked as ERT ? Look at how my slides look in LyX and in gv and you now what I am talking about. Anyway, part two of the presentation was then based on the lgt-0.3. This prooved to be very helpful though it is very easy to get lost in the lgt and switching between the enlarged screenshots and the actual document is quite cumbersome. Also at the most interesting points there is always the temptation to click on something which of course has no effect. That brough me to an idea, is there someone here who knows a little basic Java in order to call the LyX-server from within Netscape ? Is that at all possible ? I have no idea. Then one could have the LGT open, click on something and it would actually happen in LyX. That would be somehow more useful. One would not have to type all the text and could maybe do a little more math magic... The third part was titled Live fun with LyX and was to give the audience opportunity for questions and give me time to show off some of LyX's features live. All with the pre8 version I downloaded yesterday afternnon :-) That went pretty good. Questions were, - postscript support, i.e. pictures and fonts can one replace the document fonts (that are printed) and can one get nicer screen fonts. I was able to answer both questions in principle. - math editor, well actually no one asked so I did that one anyway - Latex import vs. the native LyX format vs. LinuxDoc. Comes to my mind ? How do the KDE people write their documentation ? Is Koffice ready and up for that ? - Word import, yep honestly, this was the third question I got. - spellchecker, everybody liked the spellchecker interface - printing - fax support (Can I really fax a 25 page document ?) - where to get it All in all I got very positive reactions and hope that I've caused a few people to actually give it a try. Thanks to all of you who more or less directly gave me ideas for this presentation. I have attached the LyX file of my talk, it maybe possible to include it into the LyX template collection but then, it has some significant ERT ;-) Roland On 22-Jan-99 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks to one of today's messages mentioning that Steven has put the LGT > on his Web site (thanks, Steven!). Now that I've actually had the chance > to try it out in real life, the constant reloading of images really > bothers me; i.e. I start the page (boy, do we need to get a background in > there!) and it takes a while to load (I expected this). If I click on a > thumbnail, I get the big image as expected, but then if I click on the > "back" button, it reloads all the thumbnails again. Is this behavior > observed
Re: Three pre-versions of PR doc
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 11:01:05PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote: > LyX-PR_1.txt The oldest. More or less superseded IMHO > LyX-PR_2.txt My latest from earlier this week > LyX-PR_3.txt A thorough reworking, following up on (and taking large > chunks of) Larry Marso's counterproposal. > - Which one do you prefer? (why?) It's really hard to say. I actually prefer #2. I see some of my stuff in #3, but it's been rewritten and stitched together in a very different fashion than I suggested -- and I don't think the new components accomplish what they were intended for any more. I guess that's the danger of PR by committee. ;-) What I was trying to do is unpeel an onion, getting the attention of potential new users in the open source community, and helping a reader brand new to LyX understand a few fundamentals. In #s 1, 2 and 3, I just don't get the lead in. It's a difficult question, how you talk about LyX to someone for the first time. I'd certainly never advocate saying "document processor", "structure based approach" and "predefined rule sets", in the first paragraph. Even if these are pet phrases of some LyX developers, they really say nothing to new readers. Best regards -- Larry S. Marso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Three pre-versions of PR doc
Martin, this third version is excellent !!! Roland On 22-Jan-99 Martin Vermeer wrote: > Here they are: Directory > > http://www.netby.net/Oest/Europa-Alle/vermeer/ > > Files > > LyX-PR_1.txt The oldest. More or less superseded IMHO > LyX-PR_2.txt My latest from earlier this week > LyX-PR_3.txt A thorough reworking, following up on (and taking large > chunks of) Larry Marso's counterproposal. > > I like both 2 and 3. 3 is more "sales-minded", 2 more down-to-earth suitable > perhaps for the LaTeX/Linux/science and engineering set. Perhaps we have use > for both. > > So, as time is running a bit short, I suggest the following: > > - Which one do you prefer? (why?) > - Which "point editings" (i.e. no large reorganizations, but e.g. paragraph > switches at most) are needed on that? > > Next week I will be very busy, so anything large will be a problem to do > in time. So, PLEASE try not to diverge the process :-) > > Martin > Roland Krause Visiting Research Associate - Center for Computational Mechanics Washington University, Saint Louis Roland Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
