How ready are we for 1.1.4?
It seems to me that we have managed to remove the worst bugs and is absolutely no worse off than 1.1.3. I know there are some space issues, and some "update dvi" reports, I do not understand how this happens and have failed at reproducing this... Are the configure problems resolved? If there are no further problems I'd like to release 1.1.4 friday. Lgb
How ready are we for 1.1.4?
Hi Lars, the space problem seems to be fixed now thanks to a correction by Jean Marc. I still encounter the problem that the checksums for the dependency file are not computed correctly. As far as I understand the number in the debug output extract below should not be the same all the time. In addition, I posted a few new Purify messages to the mailing list last night. Maybe somebody should take a look at atleast the first message. Apart from that I think you are ready for 1.1.4. Michael Update dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/article.cls 4294967295 4294967295 Update dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/fontenc.sty 4294967295 4294967295 Update dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/inputenc.sty 4294967295 4294967295 Update dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/latin1.def 4294967295 4294967295 Update dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/size10.clo 4294967295 4294967295 Update dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/t1enc.def 4294967295 4294967295 Update dep: /tmp/lyx_tmp474aaa/lyx_bufrtmp474aaa/newfile.tex 4294967295 4294967295 Dep. file has NOT changed Write dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/article.cls 4294967295 4294967295 Write dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/fontenc.sty 4294967295 4294967295 Write dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/inputenc.sty 4294967295 4294967295 Write dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/latin1.def 4294967295 4294967295 Write dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/size10.clo 4294967295 4294967295 Write dep: /opt/local/teTeX-0.4/texmf/tex/latex/base/t1enc.def 4294967295 4294967295 Write dep: /tmp/lyx_tmp474aaa/lyx_bufrtmp474aaa/newfile.tex 4294967295 4294967295 -- == Michael Schmittphone: +49 451 500 3725 Institute for Telematics secretary: +49 451 500 3721 Medical University of Luebeck fax: +49 451 500 3722 Ratzeburger Allee 160 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] D-23538 Luebeck, Germany WWW: http://www.itm.mu-luebeck.de == S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: How ready are we for 1.1.4?
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lars> It seems to me that we have managed to remove the worst bugs and Lars> is absolutely no worse off than 1.1.3. Lars> I know there are some space issues, and some "update dvi" Lars> reports, I do not understand how this happens and have failed at Lars> reproducing this... Those might or might not be important problems. We'll find out quickly, for sure %-| Lars> Are the configure problems resolved? No, I've been lazy. But they only concern the new --with-lyxname option. Lars> If there are no further problems I'd like to release 1.1.4 Lars> friday. I've been wanting to apply Roland patch for the cygwin port, but I did not have time today. Feel free to do it. JMarc
Re: How ready are we for 1.1.4?
Michael Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. | | --msB71C22019C5A51E42D604ABF | Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii | Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit | | Hi Lars, | | the space problem seems to be fixed now thanks to a correction by Jean | Marc. I still encounter the problem that the checksums for the | dependency file are not computed correctly. Hmm I didn't notice that. This is strange. Are you on a 64bit system? If so a switch to use int instead of long in lyxsum bight solve this. (assuming int is 32 bit) | As far as I understand the | number in the debug output extract below should not be the same all the | time. True. Off the top of my head I can only think of a 32->64 bit problem. Lgb
Re: How ready are we for 1.1.4?
"Lars Gullik Bjønnes" wrote: > Hmm I didn't notice that. This is strange. Are you on a 64bit system? > If so a switch to use int instead of long in lyxsum bight solve this. > (assuming int is 32 bit) I work on an UltraSPARC with Sun Solaris 7. According to my system administrator the UltraSPARC is a 64Bit-Prozessor but we use the 32Bit version of Solaris 7. According to a little C program using the sizeof operator the size of the data types is as follows: short = 2 bytes, int = 4 bytes, long = 4 bytes, long long = 8 bytes. > True. Off the top of my head I can only think of a 32->64 bit problem. I would have expected that Jean Marc has the same problem when he runs Lyx on the DEC platform (isn't Alpha a true 64bit platform?). Michael -- == Michael Schmittphone: +49 451 500 3725 Institute for Telematics secretary: +49 451 500 3721 Medical University of Luebeck fax: +49 451 500 3722 Ratzeburger Allee 160 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] D-23538 Luebeck, Germany WWW: http://www.itm.mu-luebeck.de == S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: How ready are we for 1.1.4?
Michael Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > Hmm I didn't notice that. This is strange. Are you on a 64bit system? | > If so a switch to use int instead of long in lyxsum bight solve this. | > (assuming int is 32 bit) | | I work on an UltraSPARC with Sun Solaris 7. According to my system | administrator the UltraSPARC is a 64Bit-Prozessor but we use the 32Bit | version of Solaris 7. According to a little C program using the sizeof | operator the size of the data types is as follows: short = 2 bytes, int | = 4 bytes, long = 4 bytes, long long = 8 bytes. Ok, so it is not that then. I am wondering what goes wrong in lyxsum... Are you able to dig a bit into that one? | > True. Off the top of my head I can only think of a 32->64 bit problem. | | I would have expected that Jean Marc has the same problem when he runs | Lyx on the DEC platform (isn't Alpha a true 64bit platform?). Hmm, but different compilers and libs might unveil bugs not encountered on other systems. Lgb
Re: How ready are we for 1.1.4?
> "Michael" == Michael Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> True. Off the top of my head I can only think of a 32->64 bit >> problem. Michael> I would have expected that Jean Marc has the same problem Michael> when he runs Lyx on the DEC platform (isn't Alpha a true Michael> 64bit platform?). Yes it is. And long is 64bits here, which causes interesting problems...
Re: How ready are we for 1.1.4?
"Lars Gullik Bjønnes" wrote: > You don't need knowledge about lyx internals to debug lyxsum.C. > > | Maybe I will be able to do some debugging in the evening (about 6 PM). I > | will try do add some printf's. Maybe you wait with releasing Lyx-1.1.4 > | until then? > > Until monday at least. Hi Lars, I took a look at lyxsum.C and first of all I found out that the MODERN_STL_STREAMS part has been compiled. The ifs is opened correctly first. However, for some strange reason readsome returns 0 characters which explains why I always get the same result. From my point of view it seems like readsome is broken. I checked for another place within Lyx but "readsome" is used only once in the whole program. When I developed a simple C++ program on my own, readsome failed again. Unfortunately, I am not able to debug readsome for the moment. So I will have to live with that problem until after the release of 1.1.4 (it's not a tragedy) Michael -- == Michael Schmittphone: +49 451 500 3725 Institute for Telematics secretary: +49 451 500 3721 Medical University of Luebeck fax: +49 451 500 3722 Ratzeburger Allee 160 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] D-23538 Luebeck, Germany WWW: http://www.itm.mu-luebeck.de == S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
