Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 07/06/11 13:59, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/07/2011 02:48 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to increase the depth of the inserted environment? Using an Inset instead of a Style. Section 5 of the doc doesn't seem to have anything on what an Inset is and why one would want to use one. I can see the section on FlexInsets but not on Insets. He meant Flex Insets. These could as well be called user definable insets. I don't know about Flex, seems to be a new name. In LyX 1.6 the definition in a layout file can be done by e.g.:: InsetLayout LandscapeSlide LyXType custom LatexType Environment LatexName slide Decoration classic LabelFont Size Small EndFont MultiPar true LabelString Landscape Slide End instead of (or in addition to):: Style LandscapeSlide CopyStyle --Separator-- LatexType Environment LatexName slide NextNoIndent1 Margin Static LeftMargin N ParIndent TopSep 0.4 LabelType Top_Environment LabelString Landscape Slide: End (There are 134 InsetLayout definitions inLYXDIR/layouts/ in LyX 2 (svn) 130 of them have Flex: in the name.) There have been some changes to this for 2.0, mostly for consistency. The Flex: prefix is now more or less required. But the rest is the same. Let me add, for the OP, that once defined these turn up at InsertCustom Inset. That's very useful, thanks. Can Insets be made to appear in the normal drop-down of structural styles? Or are they still functionally character-level markup, even though one may e declared as an environment? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 07/06/11 13:59, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/07/2011 02:48 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to increase the depth of the inserted environment? Using an Inset instead of a Style. Section 5 of the doc doesn't seem to have anything on what an Inset is and why one would want to use one. I can see the section on FlexInsets but not on Insets. He meant Flex Insets. These could as well be called user definable insets. I don't know about Flex, seems to be a new name. In LyX 1.6 the definition in a layout file can be done by e.g.:: InsetLayout LandscapeSlide LyXType custom LatexType Environment LatexName slide Decoration classic LabelFont Size Small EndFont MultiPar true LabelString Landscape Slide End instead of (or in addition to):: Style LandscapeSlide CopyStyle --Separator-- LatexType Environment LatexName slide NextNoIndent1 Margin Static LeftMargin N ParIndent TopSep 0.4 LabelType Top_Environment LabelString Landscape Slide: End (There are 134 InsetLayout definitions inLYXDIR/layouts/ in LyX 2 (svn) 130 of them have Flex: in the name.) There have been some changes to this for 2.0, mostly for consistency. The Flex: prefix is now more or less required. But the rest is the same. Let me add, for the OP, that once defined these turn up at InsertCustom Inset. That's very useful, thanks. Can Insets be made to appear in the normal drop-down of structural styles? Or are they still functionally character-level markup, even though one may e declared as an environment? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 07/06/11 13:59, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/07/2011 02:48 AM, Guenter Milde wrote: What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to "increase the depth" of the inserted environment? Using an Inset instead of a Style. Section 5 of the doc doesn't seem to have anything on what an Inset is and why one would want to use one. I can see the section on FlexInsets but not on Insets. He meant Flex Insets. These could as well be called "user definable insets". I don't know about "Flex", seems to be a new name. In LyX 1.6 the definition in a layout file can be done by e.g.:: InsetLayout LandscapeSlide LyXType custom LatexType Environment LatexName slide Decoration classic LabelFont Size Small EndFont MultiPar true LabelString "Landscape Slide" End instead of (or in addition to):: Style LandscapeSlide CopyStyle --Separator-- LatexType Environment LatexName slide NextNoIndent1 Margin Static LeftMargin N ParIndent "" TopSep 0.4 LabelType Top_Environment LabelString "Landscape Slide:" End (There are 134 "InsetLayout" definitions in/layouts/ in LyX 2 (svn) 130 of them have "Flex:" in the name.) There have been some changes to this for 2.0, mostly for consistency. The "Flex:" prefix is now more or less required. But the rest is the same. Let me add, for the OP, that once defined these turn up at Insert>Custom Inset. That's very useful, thanks. Can Insets be made to appear in the normal drop-down of structural styles? Or are they still functionally character-level markup, even though one may e declared as an environment? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 04/06/11 23:12, Guenter Milde wrote: [...] For this kind of environments, you use an Inset instead of a Style: I thought an Inset was for character-level markup. I may have misunderstood something here. it shows as a box in the LyX buffer, it is only leaved when you tell it, and it allows two subsequent instances without the --- Environment Separator --- hack. Unfortunately, beamer.layout (and some others) are older than the customizable Inset, so that it contains this End... hacks or uglier things. What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to increase the depth of the inserted environment? Using an Inset instead of a Style. Section 5 of the doc doesn't seem to have anything on what an Inset is and why one would want to use one. I can see the section on FlexInsets but not on Insets. ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 04/06/11 23:12, Guenter Milde wrote: [...] For this kind of environments, you use an Inset instead of a Style: I thought an Inset was for character-level markup. I may have misunderstood something here. it shows as a box in the LyX buffer, it is only leaved when you tell it, and it allows two subsequent instances without the --- Environment Separator --- hack. Unfortunately, beamer.layout (and some others) are older than the customizable Inset, so that it contains this End... hacks or uglier things. What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to increase the depth of the inserted environment? Using an Inset instead of a Style. Section 5 of the doc doesn't seem to have anything on what an Inset is and why one would want to use one. I can see the section on FlexInsets but not on Insets. ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 04/06/11 23:12, Guenter Milde wrote: [...] For this kind of environments, you use an Inset instead of a Style: I thought an Inset was for character-level markup. I may have misunderstood something here. it shows as a box in the LyX buffer, it is only leaved when you tell it, and it allows two subsequent instances without the "--- Environment Separator ---" hack. Unfortunately, beamer.layout (and some others) are older than the customizable Inset, so that it contains this "End..." hacks or uglier things. What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to "increase the depth" of the inserted environment? Using an Inset instead of a Style. Section 5 of the doc doesn't seem to have anything on what an Inset is and why one would want to use one. I can see the section on FlexInsets but not on Insets. ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 03/06/11 23:14, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/03/2011 05:48 PM, Peter Flynn wrote: [...] Hmmm. That's what I did: insert a list. But there's nothing in the Edit menu related to lists at that point. This is using a Beamer layout file: does that disable some of this stuff? No, it shouldn't. Here, it is at the very bottom of that menu. Try Alt-Shift-Right Arrow On 03/06/11 23:20, Julien Rioux wrote: [...] I don't think Beamer disallows it. Try to put two environments (that are different from Standard environment) one after the other. Place your cursor in the second. You will have the action Increase List Depth available and using it will wrap the second environment by the first. I found it eventually, thank you both very much. I think I need to create an EndFoo style so that I can get LyX to display something that shows the end-boundary of the environment, otherwise the user will have no idea if the cursor is still within the Foo environment when inserting the list...I have been spoiled by so many years of using XML and LaTeX where you can see the boundaries. My problem was in not expecting a function like Increase List Depth to be needed: I had assumed it was the default that a new environment would go inside the current one. If I invoke a LyX style which is defined as a LaTeX environment, I thought everything I typed or invoked from there on would go inside the environment until I did something to exit the environment. (This problem isn't unique to LyX, but most systems do it the other way round, allowing arbitrarily anything inside a style and providing no way to get outside the environment; see my comment in [1].) What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to increase the depth of the inserted environment? ///Peter -- [1] http://balisage.net/Proceedings/vol3/html/Flynn01/BalisageVol3-Flynn01.html, footnote [3].
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 03/06/11 23:14, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/03/2011 05:48 PM, Peter Flynn wrote: [...] Hmmm. That's what I did: insert a list. But there's nothing in the Edit menu related to lists at that point. This is using a Beamer layout file: does that disable some of this stuff? No, it shouldn't. Here, it is at the very bottom of that menu. Try Alt-Shift-Right Arrow On 03/06/11 23:20, Julien Rioux wrote: [...] I don't think Beamer disallows it. Try to put two environments (that are different from Standard environment) one after the other. Place your cursor in the second. You will have the action Increase List Depth available and using it will wrap the second environment by the first. I found it eventually, thank you both very much. I think I need to create an EndFoo style so that I can get LyX to display something that shows the end-boundary of the environment, otherwise the user will have no idea if the cursor is still within the Foo environment when inserting the list...I have been spoiled by so many years of using XML and LaTeX where you can see the boundaries. My problem was in not expecting a function like Increase List Depth to be needed: I had assumed it was the default that a new environment would go inside the current one. If I invoke a LyX style which is defined as a LaTeX environment, I thought everything I typed or invoked from there on would go inside the environment until I did something to exit the environment. (This problem isn't unique to LyX, but most systems do it the other way round, allowing arbitrarily anything inside a style and providing no way to get outside the environment; see my comment in [1].) What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to increase the depth of the inserted environment? ///Peter -- [1] http://balisage.net/Proceedings/vol3/html/Flynn01/BalisageVol3-Flynn01.html, footnote [3].
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 03/06/11 23:14, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/03/2011 05:48 PM, Peter Flynn wrote: [...] Hmmm. That's what I did: insert a list. But there's nothing in the Edit menu related to lists at that point. This is using a Beamer layout file: does that disable some of this stuff? No, it shouldn't. Here, it is at the very bottom of that menu. Try Alt-Shift-Right Arrow On 03/06/11 23:20, Julien Rioux wrote: [...] I don't think Beamer disallows it. Try to put two environments (that are different from "Standard" environment) one after the other. Place your cursor in the second. You will have the action "Increase List Depth" available and using it will wrap the second environment by the first. I found it eventually, thank you both very much. I think I need to create an EndFoo style so that I can get LyX to display something that shows the end-boundary of the environment, otherwise the user will have no idea if the cursor is still within the Foo environment when inserting the list...I have been spoiled by so many years of using XML and LaTeX where you can see the boundaries. My problem was in not expecting a function like Increase List Depth to be needed: I had assumed it was the default that a new environment would go inside the current one. If I invoke a LyX style which is defined as a LaTeX environment, I thought everything I typed or invoked from there on would go inside the environment until I did something to exit the environment. (This problem isn't unique to LyX, but most systems do it the other way round, allowing arbitrarily anything inside a style and providing no way to get outside the environment; see my comment in [1].) What is the trick that permits (for example) a Frame environment to contain other environments without the need to "increase the depth" of the inserted environment? ///Peter -- [1] http://balisage.net/Proceedings/vol3/html/Flynn01/BalisageVol3-Flynn01.html, footnote [3].
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 03/06/11 13:25, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/02/2011 07:35 PM, Peter Flynn wrote: On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do EditIncrease List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. There isn't an Insert List Depth item in my Edit menu, or anywhere else that I can see (2.0.0rc3 under Ubuntu 11.4). Is this a plugin or something I am missing? You'll only have it after you insert a list of some sort, i.e., when it's available to be used. Hmmm. That's what I did: insert a list. But there's nothing in the Edit menu related to lists at that point. This is using a Beamer layout file: does that disable some of this stuff? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 03/06/11 13:25, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/02/2011 07:35 PM, Peter Flynn wrote: On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do EditIncrease List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. There isn't an Insert List Depth item in my Edit menu, or anywhere else that I can see (2.0.0rc3 under Ubuntu 11.4). Is this a plugin or something I am missing? You'll only have it after you insert a list of some sort, i.e., when it's available to be used. Hmmm. That's what I did: insert a list. But there's nothing in the Edit menu related to lists at that point. This is using a Beamer layout file: does that disable some of this stuff? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 03/06/11 13:25, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/02/2011 07:35 PM, Peter Flynn wrote: On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do Edit>Increase List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. There isn't an "Insert List Depth" item in my Edit menu, or anywhere else that I can see (2.0.0rc3 under Ubuntu 11.4). Is this a plugin or something I am missing? You'll only have it after you insert a list of some sort, i.e., when it's available to be used. Hmmm. That's what I did: insert a list. But there's nothing in the Edit menu related to lists at that point. This is using a Beamer layout file: does that disable some of this stuff? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do EditIncrease List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. There isn't an Insert List Depth item in my Edit menu, or anywhere else that I can see (2.0.0rc3 under Ubuntu 11.4). Is this a plugin or something I am missing? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do EditIncrease List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. There isn't an Insert List Depth item in my Edit menu, or anywhere else that I can see (2.0.0rc3 under Ubuntu 11.4). Is this a plugin or something I am missing? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do Edit>Increase List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. There isn't an "Insert List Depth" item in my Edit menu, or anywhere else that I can see (2.0.0rc3 under Ubuntu 11.4). Is this a plugin or something I am missing? ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: [...] How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do EditIncrease List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. Aha. Excellent, thank you very much. I'll try this out. [...] but how do I tell LyX that the environment has two arguments? RequiredArgs 2 I failed to spot that, thanks. Probably because I was more anxious to ensure that prompts for them popped up when the environment was inserted. I can see that an Inset affords the option to add tokens or values, but I can't see how to make one compulsory, so that it pops up the moment you add a Foo from the menu. There's no system for automatic popup, etc. You add the arguments via the poorly named InsertShort Title, just as for optional arguments. The UI here definitely could be better. Ah, even though that prompts only with [opt]? OK. I can probably add a few words to the label so that the user can see that arguments are needed. It would certainly be nice if RequiredArgs automatically added n inset-type boxes after the style label; even nicer if there was a way to attach a prompt label to each of the arguments :-) [...] formal list of all the keywords for a .layout file As Bennett mentioned, all of these are documented in Chapter 5 of the Customization manual. I found them, many thanks. I'm not used to LyX terminology yet, so I wasn't reading the ToC properly. And thank you Bennett for pointing this out. ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: [...] How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do EditIncrease List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. Aha. Excellent, thank you very much. I'll try this out. [...] but how do I tell LyX that the environment has two arguments? RequiredArgs 2 I failed to spot that, thanks. Probably because I was more anxious to ensure that prompts for them popped up when the environment was inserted. I can see that an Inset affords the option to add tokens or values, but I can't see how to make one compulsory, so that it pops up the moment you add a Foo from the menu. There's no system for automatic popup, etc. You add the arguments via the poorly named InsertShort Title, just as for optional arguments. The UI here definitely could be better. Ah, even though that prompts only with [opt]? OK. I can probably add a few words to the label so that the user can see that arguments are needed. It would certainly be nice if RequiredArgs automatically added n inset-type boxes after the style label; even nicer if there was a way to attach a prompt label to each of the arguments :-) [...] formal list of all the keywords for a .layout file As Bennett mentioned, all of these are documented in Chapter 5 of the Customization manual. I found them, many thanks. I'm not used to LyX terminology yet, so I wasn't reading the ToC properly. And thank you Bennett for pointing this out. ///Peter
Re: Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
On 01/06/11 13:57, Richard Heck wrote: [...] How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be done on an environment by environment basis? This is normal LyX behavior. If you want the list inside, then you need to do Edit>Increase List Depth on the list items. You can do this when you insert the list, and the rest will be correct. Think of this as a nesting system. Aha. Excellent, thank you very much. I'll try this out. [...] but how do I tell LyX that the environment has two arguments? RequiredArgs 2 I failed to spot that, thanks. Probably because I was more anxious to ensure that prompts for them popped up when the environment was inserted. I can see that an Inset affords the option to add tokens or values, but I can't see how to make one compulsory, so that it pops up the moment you add a Foo from the menu. There's no system for automatic popup, etc. You add the arguments via the poorly named Insert>Short Title, just as for optional arguments. The UI here definitely could be better. Ah, even though that prompts only with [opt]? OK. I can probably add a few words to the label so that the user can see that arguments are needed. It would certainly be nice if RequiredArgs automatically added n inset-type boxes after the style label; even nicer if there was a way to attach a prompt label to each of the arguments :-) [...] formal list of all the keywords for a .layout file As Bennett mentioned, all of these are documented in Chapter 5 of the Customization manual. I found them, many thanks. I'm not used to LyX terminology yet, so I wasn't reading the ToC properly. And thank you Bennett for pointing this out. ///Peter
Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
I am having some trouble understanding how to implement a new
environment in an existing .layout file. The documentation covers the
principle, but not the detail, especially about how to enable other
environments (like lists) *inside* the one I am implementing, and how to
get LyX to prompt for any arguments required in my environment.
I have defined and tested the environment in LaTeX, and I then add to
the .layout file:
Style Foo
LatexType Environment
LatexName foo
ParSep0.5
Font
SizeSmall
Series Normal
EndFont
Preamble
\newenvironment{foo}
{\begin{quotation}\small\raggedright\noindent\ignorespaces}
{\par\end{quotation}}
EndPreamble
End
When I open a .lyx file, the entry for a Foo is there in the menu, and I
can add a few words and paragraphs and it correctly exports:
\begin{foo}
a few words
and paragraphs\end{foo}
All well so far.
But an environment should be able to contain all kinds of other
environment, like lists. If I try to add an itemized list between the
two paragraphs above, the exported LaTeX shows that LyX has terminated
the foo environment prematurely, inserted the list *outside* the
environment, and then created a new instance of the foo environment to
hold the second paragraph:
\begin{foo}
a few words\end{panel}
\begin{itemize}
\item blort\end{itemize}
\begin{panel}
and paragraphs\end{foo}
How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is
permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that
tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be
done on an environment by environment basis?
Bonus question: I will eventually want to extend the environment to add
a box and shaded background, allowing the user to specify width and
color in mandatory arguments to the Foo environment. Writing the LaTeX
definition for the Preamble is easy; but how do I tell LyX that the
environment has two arguments? I can see that an Inset affords the
option to add tokens or values, but I can't see how to make one
compulsory, so that it pops up the moment you add a Foo from the menu.
Final plea: I have been unable to find a formal list of all the keywords
for a .layout file, with their syntax and application. Does such a list
exist yet?
///Peter
Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
I am having some trouble understanding how to implement a new
environment in an existing .layout file. The documentation covers the
principle, but not the detail, especially about how to enable other
environments (like lists) *inside* the one I am implementing, and how to
get LyX to prompt for any arguments required in my environment.
I have defined and tested the environment in LaTeX, and I then add to
the .layout file:
Style Foo
LatexType Environment
LatexName foo
ParSep0.5
Font
SizeSmall
Series Normal
EndFont
Preamble
\newenvironment{foo}
{\begin{quotation}\small\raggedright\noindent\ignorespaces}
{\par\end{quotation}}
EndPreamble
End
When I open a .lyx file, the entry for a Foo is there in the menu, and I
can add a few words and paragraphs and it correctly exports:
\begin{foo}
a few words
and paragraphs\end{foo}
All well so far.
But an environment should be able to contain all kinds of other
environment, like lists. If I try to add an itemized list between the
two paragraphs above, the exported LaTeX shows that LyX has terminated
the foo environment prematurely, inserted the list *outside* the
environment, and then created a new instance of the foo environment to
hold the second paragraph:
\begin{foo}
a few words\end{panel}
\begin{itemize}
\item blort\end{itemize}
\begin{panel}
and paragraphs\end{foo}
How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is
permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that
tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be
done on an environment by environment basis?
Bonus question: I will eventually want to extend the environment to add
a box and shaded background, allowing the user to specify width and
color in mandatory arguments to the Foo environment. Writing the LaTeX
definition for the Preamble is easy; but how do I tell LyX that the
environment has two arguments? I can see that an Inset affords the
option to add tokens or values, but I can't see how to make one
compulsory, so that it pops up the moment you add a Foo from the menu.
Final plea: I have been unable to find a formal list of all the keywords
for a .layout file, with their syntax and application. Does such a list
exist yet?
///Peter
Implementing a new environment in a LyX .layout
I am having some trouble understanding how to implement a new
environment in an existing .layout file. The documentation covers the
principle, but not the detail, especially about how to enable other
environments (like lists) *inside* the one I am implementing, and how to
get LyX to prompt for any arguments required in my environment.
I have defined and tested the environment in LaTeX, and I then add to
the .layout file:
Style Foo
LatexType Environment
LatexName foo
ParSep0.5
Font
SizeSmall
> Series Normal
EndFont
Preamble
\newenvironment{foo}
{\begin{quotation}\small\raggedright\noindent\ignorespaces}
> {\par\end{quotation}}
EndPreamble
End
When I open a .lyx file, the entry for a Foo is there in the menu, and I
can add a few words and paragraphs and it correctly exports:
\begin{foo}
a few words
and paragraphs\end{foo}
All well so far.
But an environment should be able to contain all kinds of other
environment, like lists. If I try to add an itemized list between the
two paragraphs above, the exported LaTeX shows that LyX has terminated
the foo environment prematurely, inserted the list *outside* the
environment, and then created a new instance of the foo environment to
hold the second paragraph:
> \begin{foo}
> a few words\end{panel}
> \begin{itemize}
> \item blort\end{itemize}
> \begin{panel}
> and paragraphs\end{foo}
How do I tell LyX that lists (for example; and much other stuff) is
permitted inside a Foo environment? Is there a setting or switch that
tells LyX to allow nested environments globally, or does it have to be
done on an environment by environment basis?
Bonus question: I will eventually want to extend the environment to add
a box and shaded background, allowing the user to specify width and
color in mandatory arguments to the Foo environment. Writing the LaTeX
definition for the Preamble is easy; but how do I tell LyX that the
environment has two arguments? I can see that an Inset affords the
option to add tokens or values, but I can't see how to make one
compulsory, so that it pops up the moment you add a Foo from the menu.
Final plea: I have been unable to find a formal list of all the keywords
for a .layout file, with their syntax and application. Does such a list
exist yet?
///Peter
Re: tetex RPMs
Stephen P. Harris wrote: I read this description from an authoritative source (tug.org) and your opinion is quite incoherent and inexperienced when compared to it. I'm afraid we differ on various points from time to time. The TeX Collection is self-described as having progressed to the point that comprehensive began to become incomprehensible. That is a polite way of saying it had become a mess. Correct. That's why they rationalised it while changing from TeX Live to TeX Collection. It is no wonder that tetex would have received a lower priority. You also single out RedHat. Purely because it's the OS that we have most non-Windows users on here. Which of the many distros that using rpms or .deb have decided they have the time to incorporate the endless stream of upgrades in a system that in its entirety encompasses 6gigs? None, and I'm certainly not arguing that they should. Now in 2004, quite a few fundamental changes are made. And 2004 was released as a less perfected product than 2003. I don't mean that the fundamental changes were a mistake or that a lot of rough edges can be avoided in such a transition. But certainly you are not going to find a bunch of Linux distros jumping onto the bandwagon. They are not going to devote a large portion of their release to TeX, nor many man-hours to fixing TeX. Nor should they. The TC distro works as it stands: no fixing is needed. All RH (or whoever maintains the RH tetex RPMs on their behalf) needed to do was take whichever size installation they wanted to make into an RPM -- the smallest, if need be -- and do it. Instead, for some unfathomable reason, they appeared to have picked bits and pieces from different releases and cobbled them together. I will install the current version that came on the FC4 ISOs again and check it out, as I have no wish to do them an injustice if this problem has been recently fixed. The idea that the distros should do this, is undereducated and inexperienced. I have never suggested that the makers of Linux distros should do anything of this nature, only that Red Hat's distribution of tetex has been out of date for years (modulo whatever is available with RHEL4 and FC4 now -- as I just said). You speak of having users and dispensing TeX advice for 20 years. I'm afraid so. SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements. If you're referring to my ignorance of the .lyx directory, my query was based only on the implicit assumption in the OP's message that I should already have one. ///Peter
Re: tetex RPMs
Stephen P. Harris wrote: I read this description from an authoritative source (tug.org) and your opinion is quite incoherent and inexperienced when compared to it. I'm afraid we differ on various points from time to time. The TeX Collection is self-described as having progressed to the point that comprehensive began to become incomprehensible. That is a polite way of saying it had become a mess. Correct. That's why they rationalised it while changing from TeX Live to TeX Collection. It is no wonder that tetex would have received a lower priority. You also single out RedHat. Purely because it's the OS that we have most non-Windows users on here. Which of the many distros that using rpms or .deb have decided they have the time to incorporate the endless stream of upgrades in a system that in its entirety encompasses 6gigs? None, and I'm certainly not arguing that they should. Now in 2004, quite a few fundamental changes are made. And 2004 was released as a less perfected product than 2003. I don't mean that the fundamental changes were a mistake or that a lot of rough edges can be avoided in such a transition. But certainly you are not going to find a bunch of Linux distros jumping onto the bandwagon. They are not going to devote a large portion of their release to TeX, nor many man-hours to fixing TeX. Nor should they. The TC distro works as it stands: no fixing is needed. All RH (or whoever maintains the RH tetex RPMs on their behalf) needed to do was take whichever size installation they wanted to make into an RPM -- the smallest, if need be -- and do it. Instead, for some unfathomable reason, they appeared to have picked bits and pieces from different releases and cobbled them together. I will install the current version that came on the FC4 ISOs again and check it out, as I have no wish to do them an injustice if this problem has been recently fixed. The idea that the distros should do this, is undereducated and inexperienced. I have never suggested that the makers of Linux distros should do anything of this nature, only that Red Hat's distribution of tetex has been out of date for years (modulo whatever is available with RHEL4 and FC4 now -- as I just said). You speak of having users and dispensing TeX advice for 20 years. I'm afraid so. SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements. If you're referring to my ignorance of the .lyx directory, my query was based only on the implicit assumption in the OP's message that I should already have one. ///Peter
Re: tetex RPMs
Stephen P. Harris wrote: I read this description from an authoritative source (tug.org) and your opinion is quite incoherent and inexperienced when compared to it. I'm afraid we differ on various points from time to time. The TeX Collection is self-described as having progressed to the point "that comprehensive began to become incomprehensible". That is a polite way of saying it had become a mess. Correct. That's why they rationalised it while changing from TeX Live to TeX Collection. It is no wonder that tetex would have received a lower priority. You also single out RedHat. Purely because it's the OS that we have most non-Windows users on here. Which of the many distros that using rpms or .deb have decided they have the time to incorporate the endless stream of upgrades in a system that in its entirety encompasses 6gigs? None, and I'm certainly not arguing that they should. Now in 2004, quite a few fundamental changes are made. And 2004 was released as a less perfected product than 2003. I don't mean that the fundamental changes were a mistake or that a lot of rough edges can be avoided in such a transition. But certainly you are not going to find a bunch of Linux distros jumping onto the bandwagon. They are not going to devote a large portion of their release to TeX, nor many man-hours to fixing TeX. Nor should they. The TC distro works as it stands: no "fixing" is needed. All RH (or whoever maintains the RH tetex RPMs on their behalf) needed to do was take whichever size installation they wanted to make into an RPM -- the smallest, if need be -- and do it. Instead, for some unfathomable reason, they appeared to have picked bits and pieces from different releases and cobbled them together. I will install the current version that came on the FC4 ISOs again and check it out, as I have no wish to do them an injustice if this problem has been recently fixed. The idea that the distros should do this, is undereducated and inexperienced. I have never suggested that the makers of Linux distros should do anything of this nature, only that Red Hat's distribution of tetex has been out of date for years (modulo whatever is available with RHEL4 and FC4 now -- as I just said). You speak of having users and dispensing TeX advice for 20 years. I'm afraid so. SH: You've certainly done a good job in establishing your unique qualifications for your sweeping pronouncements. If you're referring to my ignorance of the .lyx directory, my query was based only on the implicit assumption in the OP's message that I should already have one. ///Peter
Re: drag-and-drop with non-ascii characters
Pol wrote: Hi, I was not able to copy a file by drag and drop from konqueror into the lyx editor, since the non-ascii character in the file name (an accented letter, in my case) is erased during the procedure. Is it possible to fix that? Non-ASCII characters in URIs should not be used unencoded. I don't know who is at fault here: the page author for publishing a page with a non-ASCII character in the URI, or Konq for passing it on (or not, as the case may be); hardly LyX, unless it was LyX that elided it. I do not know if it is a lyx or kde related issue, so i am sending to both discussion forums. Tell the author to change the name of the file to use ASCII characters, and all will be well. If they argue, tell them to read RFC 2396, eg http://www.gbiv.com/protocols/uri/rfc/rfc2396.html#rfc.section.2.1 ///Peter
OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Jose' Matos wrote: On Saturday 10 September 2005 19:23, Peter Flynn wrote: 2. yum install lyx. Aaaaggghhh! *Never*, never, never do this if you already have TeX. Especially not if you have already carefully removed the outdated mess that is the RH kludge of tetex, and replaced it with the real tetex from the TeX Collection DVD. If you do that you are on your own. No, RH is on its own. Posters to c.t.t have consistently told users of the RH tetex RPMs to trash them and replace them with the TUG CDs. One other possibility is to redo the tetex rpm and then yum will work. The TeX community has been trying for years to get whoever is responsible for the RH tetex RPMs to update them properly. But they insist on meddling with the directories and the subset of features apparently deliberately to make it inconsistent with the TUG CDs. I have no idea why they insist on doing this. What are the problems you have with FC tetex package? It was out of date last time I looked. I have consistently told my users never to install it but always to use the TUG CDs instead. For FC4 I didn't even bother looking at it, just ripped it out immediately the OS was installed (http://silmaril.ie/cgi-bin/blog#fc4). If it has been updated, then the foregoing does not apply, and I owe the maintainer an apology. Have you reported it to bugzilla.redhat.com? I believe people have tried, but BugZilla is virtually useless: all it does is provide a talking-shop for the packagers to explain why they won't change. I have reports and requests in for various pieces of s/w pending for years, and all the authors do is talk. One other possibility would be to package that version and replace the require in lyx rpm from tetex to tex... All that's required is for the maintainer of the tetex RPMs to use up-to-date versions from CTAN, and for the author of the embedded install script in the LyX RPM to test for a working kpsewhich instead of assuming it's in the location the RH tetex RPMs install it. Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and the inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we have. I suggest we don't pursue this here but move it offline. ///Peter
Re: drag-and-drop with non-ascii characters
Pol wrote: Hi, I was not able to copy a file by drag and drop from konqueror into the lyx editor, since the non-ascii character in the file name (an accented letter, in my case) is erased during the procedure. Is it possible to fix that? Non-ASCII characters in URIs should not be used unencoded. I don't know who is at fault here: the page author for publishing a page with a non-ASCII character in the URI, or Konq for passing it on (or not, as the case may be); hardly LyX, unless it was LyX that elided it. I do not know if it is a lyx or kde related issue, so i am sending to both discussion forums. Tell the author to change the name of the file to use ASCII characters, and all will be well. If they argue, tell them to read RFC 2396, eg http://www.gbiv.com/protocols/uri/rfc/rfc2396.html#rfc.section.2.1 ///Peter
OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Jose' Matos wrote: On Saturday 10 September 2005 19:23, Peter Flynn wrote: 2. yum install lyx. Aaaaggghhh! *Never*, never, never do this if you already have TeX. Especially not if you have already carefully removed the outdated mess that is the RH kludge of tetex, and replaced it with the real tetex from the TeX Collection DVD. If you do that you are on your own. No, RH is on its own. Posters to c.t.t have consistently told users of the RH tetex RPMs to trash them and replace them with the TUG CDs. One other possibility is to redo the tetex rpm and then yum will work. The TeX community has been trying for years to get whoever is responsible for the RH tetex RPMs to update them properly. But they insist on meddling with the directories and the subset of features apparently deliberately to make it inconsistent with the TUG CDs. I have no idea why they insist on doing this. What are the problems you have with FC tetex package? It was out of date last time I looked. I have consistently told my users never to install it but always to use the TUG CDs instead. For FC4 I didn't even bother looking at it, just ripped it out immediately the OS was installed (http://silmaril.ie/cgi-bin/blog#fc4). If it has been updated, then the foregoing does not apply, and I owe the maintainer an apology. Have you reported it to bugzilla.redhat.com? I believe people have tried, but BugZilla is virtually useless: all it does is provide a talking-shop for the packagers to explain why they won't change. I have reports and requests in for various pieces of s/w pending for years, and all the authors do is talk. One other possibility would be to package that version and replace the require in lyx rpm from tetex to tex... All that's required is for the maintainer of the tetex RPMs to use up-to-date versions from CTAN, and for the author of the embedded install script in the LyX RPM to test for a working kpsewhich instead of assuming it's in the location the RH tetex RPMs install it. Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and the inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we have. I suggest we don't pursue this here but move it offline. ///Peter
Re: drag-and-drop with non-ascii characters
Pol wrote: Hi, I was not able to copy a file by drag and drop from konqueror into the lyx editor, since the non-ascii character in the file name (an accented letter, in my case) is erased during the procedure. Is it possible to fix that? Non-ASCII characters in URIs should not be used unencoded. I don't know who is at fault here: the page author for publishing a page with a non-ASCII character in the URI, or Konq for passing it on (or not, as the case may be); hardly LyX, unless it was LyX that elided it. I do not know if it is a lyx or kde related issue, so i am sending to both discussion forums. Tell the author to change the name of the file to use ASCII characters, and all will be well. If they argue, tell them to read RFC 2396, eg http://www.gbiv.com/protocols/uri/rfc/rfc2396.html#rfc.section.2.1 ///Peter
OT: tetex RPMs (was: Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Jose' Matos wrote: On Saturday 10 September 2005 19:23, Peter Flynn wrote: 2. yum install lyx. Aaaaggghhh! *Never*, never, never do this if you already have TeX. Especially not if you have already carefully removed the outdated mess that is the RH kludge of tetex, and replaced it with the real tetex from the TeX Collection DVD. If you do that you are on your own. No, RH is on its own. Posters to c.t.t have consistently told users of the RH tetex RPMs to trash them and replace them with the TUG CDs. One other possibility is to redo the tetex rpm and then yum will work. The TeX community has been trying for years to get whoever is responsible for the RH tetex RPMs to update them properly. But they insist on meddling with the directories and the subset of features apparently deliberately to make it inconsistent with the TUG CDs. I have no idea why they insist on doing this. What are the problems you have with FC tetex package? It was out of date last time I looked. I have consistently told my users never to install it but always to use the TUG CDs instead. For FC4 I didn't even bother looking at it, just ripped it out immediately the OS was installed (http://silmaril.ie/cgi-bin/blog#fc4). If it has been updated, then the foregoing does not apply, and I owe the maintainer an apology. Have you reported it to bugzilla.redhat.com? I believe people have tried, but BugZilla is virtually useless: all it does is provide a talking-shop for the packagers to explain why they won't change. I have reports and requests in for various pieces of s/w pending for years, and all the authors do is talk. One other possibility would be to package that version and replace the require in lyx rpm from tetex to tex... All that's required is for the maintainer of the tetex RPMs to use up-to-date versions from CTAN, and for the author of the embedded install script in the LyX RPM to test for a working kpsewhich instead of assuming it's in the location the RH tetex RPMs install it. Sorry for the OT flak, but I've been supporting TeX for 20 years, and the inconsistencies of the RH tetex RPMs are the biggest headache we have. I suggest we don't pursue this here but move it offline. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul Smith wrote: 2. yum install lyx. Aaaaggghhh! *Never*, never, never do this if you already have TeX. Especially not if you have already carefully removed the outdated mess that is the RH kludge of tetex, and replaced it with the real tetex from the TeX Collection DVD. yum fails to see that you already have TeX installed, so it will try to download and install the old RH tetex all over again -- the one I so carefully got rid of when I installed FC4. Fortunately, yum pauses before installing, to ask if this is right, so you get the chance to abort it. Someone who wrote yum needs praising for doing this, and someone needs to check about using the old RH tetex RPMs without testing first for the existence of a TeX installation. In the process, however, I noticed that yum wanted to install lyx-1.3.6-4.fc4.i386.rpm, not the lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm or lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_xforms.i386.rpm which are advertised on lyx.org. And it wants something called aiksaurus, which looks quite useful. rpm -Uiv --nodeps happily stamped all over previous traces of LyX installations, but as expected: var/tmp/rpm-tmp.972: line 3: texhash: command not found error: %postun(lyx-1.3.6-1_qt.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.972: line 3: texhash: command not found error: %postun(lyx-1.3.6-1_xforms.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 Even money says that the install script is hard-wired to look in wherever RH's tetex puts the texhash (and doubtless kpsewhich) binary, instead of relying on the path to pick up the right one. No matter, all is now serene. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul A. Rubin wrote: Sorry, my wording was fuzzy. I don't have a working Linux box handy these days, but I assume that LyX runs with the permissions of whatever user is logged in. So if you can run latex directly, presumably when you run the LyX configure script it has the same permissions. Actually the other way round: RPMs *have* to be installed as root, and the configure script is built into the RPM, so it automatically executes *as root* immediately after unpacking LyX...the user doesn't enter into this at all. If you're motivated, you could hack the configure script to add a couple I don't have access to configure scripts embedded in RPMs unless I go get the Source RPM, and life's too short to dig into those. of echo commands that might tell you at least where things are going south. If I'm reading the configure script correctly, the quest for a working copy of LaTeX is done in two parts. First, every directory on the path is scanned for either 'latex' or 'latex2e'. (More precisely, the path is scanned for 'latex', then if necessary for 'latex2e'.) If a This is madness. All it has to do is a `which kpsewhich` to find out if a local installation of TeX exists or not. *Then* it can test the version of LaTeX identified, and see if it works, and only go hunting for latex binaries as a last resort. file with the correct name is found, LyX then tries to run it against a test .ltx file to determine if it's a working version of LaTeX. So it might be helpful to echo each directory being searched. By the way, IIRC there have been misadventures in the past caused by people having a both functional and dysfunctional LaTeX installations, with the dysfunctional one first on the path. Absolutely. Some people have truly the weirdest stuff on their systems. But it's a better plan to search for a working version first, and only go looking for a better one if the first one turns out to be a lemon. If I'm reading the script correctly (and that's a big if, since I'm not a Linux user), once it finds a 'latex' file, it stops searching for other 'latex' files even if the one it finds doesn't pass the functionality test. Might be worth checking. Searching for latex is a poor route to take, and should be used only as a last resort. kpsewhich is the key to identifying a working TeX installation. Thanks for all your help...it's working, and all I wanted to do was screenshot it and document the installation process for my readers, which I'm now able to do :-) Now all I have left to do is find a willing vict^H^H^H^Hsucke^H^H^H^H^Hvolunteer to do the same for Windows and Mac. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Stephen P. Harris wrote: [me] Previously: No matter, all is now serene. Oh, how nice. I suppose you were able to get a good screenshot of LyX -- View -- Tex Information -- Latex classes (*.cls) which displayed a partial list of your installed classes? It displayed the whole lot, including the ones I have written locally (which are in $TEXMFLOCAL). Interesting -- despite the LyX RPM having insisted at install time on wanting the RH tetex installed as a dependency, once installed without it it seems to recognise my TeX Collection installation perfectly happily. But this may have been due to stuff being left over from a previous (partial) install. I think that this a good screenshot for documenting a proper installation since that area sometimes fails to resolve due to usr mistakes. It's a very good test, yes. My screenshot in http://research.silmaril.ie/latex/chapter2.html#editors is rather out of date. The Windows installation is easy, We shall see. I'll be installing it under XP/SP2 on a system with the TeX Collection (MiKTeX+TeXnicCenter) preinstalled. This has been very useful for some projects of my own as well, which need to be able to recognise a working TeX installation. Thank you all very much for your help. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul Smith wrote: [me] Is anyone out there using LyX on FC4? I am using LyX on FC4 with no problem. The way I installed it was: 1. copied my own .lyx directory into my home directory; 2. yum install lyx. Excellent! Never used yum before, so here goes. I wonder will it work over the top of the mess that the RPMs left behind them... But what is the .lyx directory you mentioned? Something that pre-existed from an earlier installation? Or something you downloaded? ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul Smith wrote: 2. yum install lyx. Aaaaggghhh! *Never*, never, never do this if you already have TeX. Especially not if you have already carefully removed the outdated mess that is the RH kludge of tetex, and replaced it with the real tetex from the TeX Collection DVD. yum fails to see that you already have TeX installed, so it will try to download and install the old RH tetex all over again -- the one I so carefully got rid of when I installed FC4. Fortunately, yum pauses before installing, to ask if this is right, so you get the chance to abort it. Someone who wrote yum needs praising for doing this, and someone needs to check about using the old RH tetex RPMs without testing first for the existence of a TeX installation. In the process, however, I noticed that yum wanted to install lyx-1.3.6-4.fc4.i386.rpm, not the lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm or lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_xforms.i386.rpm which are advertised on lyx.org. And it wants something called aiksaurus, which looks quite useful. rpm -Uiv --nodeps happily stamped all over previous traces of LyX installations, but as expected: var/tmp/rpm-tmp.972: line 3: texhash: command not found error: %postun(lyx-1.3.6-1_qt.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.972: line 3: texhash: command not found error: %postun(lyx-1.3.6-1_xforms.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 Even money says that the install script is hard-wired to look in wherever RH's tetex puts the texhash (and doubtless kpsewhich) binary, instead of relying on the path to pick up the right one. No matter, all is now serene. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul A. Rubin wrote: Sorry, my wording was fuzzy. I don't have a working Linux box handy these days, but I assume that LyX runs with the permissions of whatever user is logged in. So if you can run latex directly, presumably when you run the LyX configure script it has the same permissions. Actually the other way round: RPMs *have* to be installed as root, and the configure script is built into the RPM, so it automatically executes *as root* immediately after unpacking LyX...the user doesn't enter into this at all. If you're motivated, you could hack the configure script to add a couple I don't have access to configure scripts embedded in RPMs unless I go get the Source RPM, and life's too short to dig into those. of echo commands that might tell you at least where things are going south. If I'm reading the configure script correctly, the quest for a working copy of LaTeX is done in two parts. First, every directory on the path is scanned for either 'latex' or 'latex2e'. (More precisely, the path is scanned for 'latex', then if necessary for 'latex2e'.) If a This is madness. All it has to do is a `which kpsewhich` to find out if a local installation of TeX exists or not. *Then* it can test the version of LaTeX identified, and see if it works, and only go hunting for latex binaries as a last resort. file with the correct name is found, LyX then tries to run it against a test .ltx file to determine if it's a working version of LaTeX. So it might be helpful to echo each directory being searched. By the way, IIRC there have been misadventures in the past caused by people having a both functional and dysfunctional LaTeX installations, with the dysfunctional one first on the path. Absolutely. Some people have truly the weirdest stuff on their systems. But it's a better plan to search for a working version first, and only go looking for a better one if the first one turns out to be a lemon. If I'm reading the script correctly (and that's a big if, since I'm not a Linux user), once it finds a 'latex' file, it stops searching for other 'latex' files even if the one it finds doesn't pass the functionality test. Might be worth checking. Searching for latex is a poor route to take, and should be used only as a last resort. kpsewhich is the key to identifying a working TeX installation. Thanks for all your help...it's working, and all I wanted to do was screenshot it and document the installation process for my readers, which I'm now able to do :-) Now all I have left to do is find a willing vict^H^H^H^Hsucke^H^H^H^H^Hvolunteer to do the same for Windows and Mac. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Stephen P. Harris wrote: [me] Previously: No matter, all is now serene. Oh, how nice. I suppose you were able to get a good screenshot of LyX -- View -- Tex Information -- Latex classes (*.cls) which displayed a partial list of your installed classes? It displayed the whole lot, including the ones I have written locally (which are in $TEXMFLOCAL). Interesting -- despite the LyX RPM having insisted at install time on wanting the RH tetex installed as a dependency, once installed without it it seems to recognise my TeX Collection installation perfectly happily. But this may have been due to stuff being left over from a previous (partial) install. I think that this a good screenshot for documenting a proper installation since that area sometimes fails to resolve due to usr mistakes. It's a very good test, yes. My screenshot in http://research.silmaril.ie/latex/chapter2.html#editors is rather out of date. The Windows installation is easy, We shall see. I'll be installing it under XP/SP2 on a system with the TeX Collection (MiKTeX+TeXnicCenter) preinstalled. This has been very useful for some projects of my own as well, which need to be able to recognise a working TeX installation. Thank you all very much for your help. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul Smith wrote: [me] Is anyone out there using LyX on FC4? I am using LyX on FC4 with no problem. The way I installed it was: 1. copied my own .lyx directory into my home directory; 2. yum install lyx. Excellent! Never used yum before, so here goes. I wonder will it work over the top of the mess that the RPMs left behind them... But what is the .lyx directory you mentioned? Something that pre-existed from an earlier installation? Or something you downloaded? ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul Smith wrote: 2. yum install lyx. Aaaaggghhh! *Never*, never, never do this if you already have TeX. Especially not if you have already carefully removed the outdated mess that is the RH kludge of tetex, and replaced it with the real tetex from the TeX Collection DVD. yum fails to see that you already have TeX installed, so it will try to download and install the old RH tetex all over again -- the one I so carefully got rid of when I installed FC4. Fortunately, yum pauses before installing, to ask if this is right, so you get the chance to abort it. Someone who wrote yum needs praising for doing this, and someone needs to check about using the old RH tetex RPMs without testing first for the existence of a TeX installation. In the process, however, I noticed that yum wanted to install lyx-1.3.6-4.fc4.i386.rpm, not the lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm or lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_xforms.i386.rpm which are advertised on lyx.org. And it wants something called aiksaurus, which looks quite useful. rpm -Uiv --nodeps happily stamped all over previous traces of LyX installations, but as expected: var/tmp/rpm-tmp.972: line 3: texhash: command not found error: %postun(lyx-1.3.6-1_qt.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.972: line 3: texhash: command not found error: %postun(lyx-1.3.6-1_xforms.i386) scriptlet failed, exit status 127 Even money says that the install script is hard-wired to look in wherever RH's tetex puts the texhash (and doubtless kpsewhich) binary, instead of relying on the path to pick up the right one. No matter, all is now serene. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul A. Rubin wrote: Sorry, my wording was fuzzy. I don't have a working Linux box handy these days, but I assume that LyX runs with the permissions of whatever user is logged in. So if you can run latex directly, presumably when you run the LyX configure script it has the same permissions. Actually the other way round: RPMs *have* to be installed as root, and the configure script is built into the RPM, so it automatically executes *as root* immediately after unpacking LyX...the user doesn't enter into this at all. If you're motivated, you could hack the configure script to add a couple I don't have access to configure scripts embedded in RPMs unless I go get the Source RPM, and life's too short to dig into those. of echo commands that might tell you at least where things are going south. If I'm reading the configure script correctly, the quest for a working copy of LaTeX is done in two parts. First, every directory on the path is scanned for either 'latex' or 'latex2e'. (More precisely, the path is scanned for 'latex', then if necessary for 'latex2e'.) If a This is madness. All it has to do is a `which kpsewhich` to find out if a local installation of TeX exists or not. *Then* it can test the version of LaTeX identified, and see if it works, and only go hunting for latex binaries as a last resort. file with the correct name is found, LyX then tries to run it against a test .ltx file to determine if it's a working version of LaTeX. So it might be helpful to echo each directory being searched. By the way, IIRC there have been misadventures in the past caused by people having a both functional and dysfunctional LaTeX installations, with the dysfunctional one first on the path. Absolutely. Some people have truly the weirdest stuff on their systems. But it's a better plan to search for a working version first, and only go looking for a better one if the first one turns out to be a lemon. If I'm reading the script correctly (and that's a big "if", since I'm not a Linux user), once it finds a 'latex' file, it stops searching for other 'latex' files even if the one it finds doesn't pass the functionality test. Might be worth checking. Searching for "latex" is a poor route to take, and should be used only as a last resort. kpsewhich is the key to identifying a working TeX installation. Thanks for all your help...it's working, and all I wanted to do was screenshot it and document the installation process for my readers, which I'm now able to do :-) Now all I have left to do is find a willing vict^H^H^H^Hsucke^H^H^H^H^Hvolunteer to do the same for Windows and Mac. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Stephen P. Harris wrote: [me] Previously: No matter, all is now serene. Oh, how nice. I suppose you were able to get a good screenshot of LyX --> View --> Tex Information --> Latex classes (*.cls) which displayed a partial list of your installed classes? It displayed the whole lot, including the ones I have written locally (which are in $TEXMFLOCAL). Interesting -- despite the LyX RPM having insisted at install time on wanting the RH tetex installed as a dependency, once installed without it it seems to recognise my TeX Collection installation perfectly happily. But this may have been due to stuff being left over from a previous (partial) install. I think that this a good screenshot for documenting a proper installation since that area sometimes fails to resolve due to usr mistakes. It's a very good test, yes. My screenshot in http://research.silmaril.ie/latex/chapter2.html#editors is rather out of date. The Windows installation is easy, We shall see. I'll be installing it under XP/SP2 on a system with the TeX Collection (MiKTeX+TeXnicCenter) preinstalled. This has been very useful for some projects of my own as well, which need to be able to recognise a working TeX installation. Thank you all very much for your help. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul Smith wrote: On 9/9/05, Peter Flynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. Apparently, the problem is not caused by LyX. Try to run (as root) on the command line the two problematic commands (kpsewhich and texhash). In case they do not work, it makes clear that the problem is not LyX related. I'm sorry, I should have made it clear that the TeX installation works correctly: texhash and kpsewhich are fully functional both as root and for logged-in users. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul A. Rubin wrote: Peter Flynn wrote: I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. It's not just kpsewhich and texhash -- both install scripts failed to find a working latex executable. IIRC, the install scripts for look for latex and latex2e by trying to execute them. Assuming that your latex executable is on the global path and works (which you can test by trying to run it from a shell prompt), Yes, all that is working fine. The problem does not appear to lie with the installation of TeX. you might check whether there's a permissions problem (is the LyX install script running under an account that can access the LaTeX installation). How do I know what account the LyX postinstall script from the RPM has picked to run as? The RPM was installed as root, of course, but if LyX has picked something else to use to run its script, that is hidden from sight -- what's the best way to find out (and why on earth would they want to do such a weird thing anyway?). kpsewhich and all the TeX binaries are in /usr/local/bin, which is in every user's path, AFAIK. At the moment could someone note on the web site that LyX is not installable with the RPMs on stock FC4 with the teTeX from the TeX Collection DVD. Is anyone out there using LyX on FC4? ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul Smith wrote: On 9/9/05, Peter Flynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. Apparently, the problem is not caused by LyX. Try to run (as root) on the command line the two problematic commands (kpsewhich and texhash). In case they do not work, it makes clear that the problem is not LyX related. I'm sorry, I should have made it clear that the TeX installation works correctly: texhash and kpsewhich are fully functional both as root and for logged-in users. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul A. Rubin wrote: Peter Flynn wrote: I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. It's not just kpsewhich and texhash -- both install scripts failed to find a working latex executable. IIRC, the install scripts for look for latex and latex2e by trying to execute them. Assuming that your latex executable is on the global path and works (which you can test by trying to run it from a shell prompt), Yes, all that is working fine. The problem does not appear to lie with the installation of TeX. you might check whether there's a permissions problem (is the LyX install script running under an account that can access the LaTeX installation). How do I know what account the LyX postinstall script from the RPM has picked to run as? The RPM was installed as root, of course, but if LyX has picked something else to use to run its script, that is hidden from sight -- what's the best way to find out (and why on earth would they want to do such a weird thing anyway?). kpsewhich and all the TeX binaries are in /usr/local/bin, which is in every user's path, AFAIK. At the moment could someone note on the web site that LyX is not installable with the RPMs on stock FC4 with the teTeX from the TeX Collection DVD. Is anyone out there using LyX on FC4? ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul Smith wrote: On 9/9/05, Peter Flynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. Apparently, the problem is not caused by LyX. Try to run (as root) on the command line the two problematic commands (kpsewhich and texhash). In case they do not work, it makes clear that the problem is not LyX related. I'm sorry, I should have made it clear that the TeX installation works correctly: texhash and kpsewhich are fully functional both as root and for logged-in users. ///Peter
Re: Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
Paul A. Rubin wrote: Peter Flynn wrote: I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. It's not just kpsewhich and texhash -- both install scripts failed to find a working latex executable. IIRC, the install scripts for look for latex and latex2e by trying to execute them. Assuming that your latex executable is on the global path and works (which you can test by trying to run it from a shell prompt), Yes, all that is working fine. The problem does not appear to lie with the installation of TeX. you might check whether there's a permissions problem (is the LyX install script running under an account that can access the LaTeX installation). How do I know what account the LyX postinstall script from the RPM has picked to run as? The RPM was installed as root, of course, but if LyX has picked something else to use to run its script, that is hidden from sight -- what's the best way to find out (and why on earth would they want to do such a weird thing anyway?). kpsewhich and all the TeX binaries are in /usr/local/bin, which is in every user's path, AFAIK. At the moment could someone note on the web site that LyX is not installable with the RPMs on stock FC4 with the teTeX from the TeX Collection DVD. Is anyone out there using LyX on FC4? ///Peter
Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. ///Peter Log: [EMAIL PROTECTED] software]# ls -l lyx* -rw-rw-r-- 1 peter peter 5972575 Sep 9 00:54 lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 peter peter 5935162 Sep 9 00:54 lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_xforms.i386.rpm [EMAIL PROTECTED] software]# rpm -hiv lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm Preparing...### [100%] 1:lyx### [100%] /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.64953: line 2: texhash: command not found Configuring LyX for your system... checking for a LaTeX2e program... (latex latex2e) +checking for latex... no +checking for latex2e... no checking for a LaTeX - LyX converter... (reLyX) +checking for reLyX... yes checking for a Noweb - LyX converter... (noweb2lyx) +checking for noweb2lyx... yes checking for a Noweb - LaTeX converter... (noweave) +checking for noweave... no checking for a HTML - Latex converter... (html2latex) +checking for html2latex... no checking for a MSWord - Latex converter... (wvCleanLatex word2x) +checking for wvCleanLatex... no +checking for word2x... no checking for Image converter... (convert) +checking for convert... yes checking for a Postscript previewer... (gsview32 gv ghostview) +checking for gsview32... no +checking for gv... yes checking for a PDF preview... (acrobat acrord32 gsview32 acroread gv ghostview xpdf) +checking for acrobat... no +checking for acrord32... no +checking for gsview32... no +checking for acroread... no +checking for gv... yes checking for a DVI previewer... (xdvi windvi yap) +checking for xdvi... no +checking for windvi... no +checking for yap... no checking for a HTML previewer... (mozilla file://$$p$$i netscape) +checking for mozilla... yes checking for a PS to PDF converter... (ps2pdf13 $$i) +checking for ps2pdf13... yes checking for a DVI to PS converter... (dvips) +checking for dvips... no checking for a DVI to PDF converter... (dvipdfm) +checking for dvipdfm... no checking for a *roff formatter... (groff -t -Tlatin1 $$FName nroff) +checking for groff... yes checking for ChkTeX... (chktex -n1 -n3 -n6 -n9 -n22 -n25 -n30 -n38) +checking for chktex... no checking for a spell-checker... (ispell) +checking for ispell... yes checking for Octave... (octave) +checking for octave... no checking for Maple... (maple) +checking for maple... no checking for a fax program... (kdeprintfax ksendfax) +checking for kdeprintfax... yes checking for SGML-tools 1.x (LinuxDoc)... (sgml2lyx) +checking for sgml2lyx... yes checking for SGML-tools 2.x (DocBook) or db2x scripts... (sgmltools db2dvi) +checking for sgmltools... no +checking for db2dvi... yes checking for a spool command... (lp lpr) +checking for lp... yes checking for a LaTeX - HTML converter... (tth latex2html hevea) +checking for tth... no +checking for latex2html... no +checking for hevea... no checking LaTeX configuration... default values +checking list of textclasses... done creating packages.lst creating doc/LaTeXConfig.lyx checking whether TeX allows spaces in file names... creating lyxrc.defaults checking for an FIG - EPS/PPM converter... (fig2dev) +checking for fig2dev... no checking for an TIFF - PS converter... (tiff2ps) +checking for tiff2ps... yes checking for an TGIF - EPS/PPM converter... (tgif) +checking for tgif... no checking for an EPS - PDF converter... (epstopdf) +checking for epstopdf... no checking for a Grace - Image converter... (gracebat) +checking for gracebat... no checking for TeX fonts +checking for cmex10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmmi10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmr10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmsy10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for eufm10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for msam10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line
Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. ///Peter Log: [EMAIL PROTECTED] software]# ls -l lyx* -rw-rw-r-- 1 peter peter 5972575 Sep 9 00:54 lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 peter peter 5935162 Sep 9 00:54 lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_xforms.i386.rpm [EMAIL PROTECTED] software]# rpm -hiv lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm Preparing...### [100%] 1:lyx### [100%] /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.64953: line 2: texhash: command not found Configuring LyX for your system... checking for a LaTeX2e program... (latex latex2e) +checking for latex... no +checking for latex2e... no checking for a LaTeX - LyX converter... (reLyX) +checking for reLyX... yes checking for a Noweb - LyX converter... (noweb2lyx) +checking for noweb2lyx... yes checking for a Noweb - LaTeX converter... (noweave) +checking for noweave... no checking for a HTML - Latex converter... (html2latex) +checking for html2latex... no checking for a MSWord - Latex converter... (wvCleanLatex word2x) +checking for wvCleanLatex... no +checking for word2x... no checking for Image converter... (convert) +checking for convert... yes checking for a Postscript previewer... (gsview32 gv ghostview) +checking for gsview32... no +checking for gv... yes checking for a PDF preview... (acrobat acrord32 gsview32 acroread gv ghostview xpdf) +checking for acrobat... no +checking for acrord32... no +checking for gsview32... no +checking for acroread... no +checking for gv... yes checking for a DVI previewer... (xdvi windvi yap) +checking for xdvi... no +checking for windvi... no +checking for yap... no checking for a HTML previewer... (mozilla file://$$p$$i netscape) +checking for mozilla... yes checking for a PS to PDF converter... (ps2pdf13 $$i) +checking for ps2pdf13... yes checking for a DVI to PS converter... (dvips) +checking for dvips... no checking for a DVI to PDF converter... (dvipdfm) +checking for dvipdfm... no checking for a *roff formatter... (groff -t -Tlatin1 $$FName nroff) +checking for groff... yes checking for ChkTeX... (chktex -n1 -n3 -n6 -n9 -n22 -n25 -n30 -n38) +checking for chktex... no checking for a spell-checker... (ispell) +checking for ispell... yes checking for Octave... (octave) +checking for octave... no checking for Maple... (maple) +checking for maple... no checking for a fax program... (kdeprintfax ksendfax) +checking for kdeprintfax... yes checking for SGML-tools 1.x (LinuxDoc)... (sgml2lyx) +checking for sgml2lyx... yes checking for SGML-tools 2.x (DocBook) or db2x scripts... (sgmltools db2dvi) +checking for sgmltools... no +checking for db2dvi... yes checking for a spool command... (lp lpr) +checking for lp... yes checking for a LaTeX - HTML converter... (tth latex2html hevea) +checking for tth... no +checking for latex2html... no +checking for hevea... no checking LaTeX configuration... default values +checking list of textclasses... done creating packages.lst creating doc/LaTeXConfig.lyx checking whether TeX allows spaces in file names... creating lyxrc.defaults checking for an FIG - EPS/PPM converter... (fig2dev) +checking for fig2dev... no checking for an TIFF - PS converter... (tiff2ps) +checking for tiff2ps... yes checking for an TGIF - EPS/PPM converter... (tgif) +checking for tgif... no checking for an EPS - PDF converter... (epstopdf) +checking for epstopdf... no checking for a Grace - Image converter... (gracebat) +checking for gracebat... no checking for TeX fonts +checking for cmex10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmmi10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmr10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmsy10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for eufm10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for msam10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line
Problems installing 1.3.6-1 RPMs
I just tried to install Lyx from the 1.3.6-1 RPMs. It can't find the commands kpsewhich and texhash, which is weird because they are both in the global path. The TeX is a new full install from the TeX Collection DVD. How do I get around this? Is the postinstall script SUing to some strange UID (the RPM install is done as root, of course). This happens for both xforms and qt versions (tried both) and now they won't uninstall cleanly either, because they're trying to undo stuff that never got done. ///Peter Log: [EMAIL PROTECTED] software]# ls -l lyx* -rw-rw-r-- 1 peter peter 5972575 Sep 9 00:54 lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 peter peter 5935162 Sep 9 00:54 lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_xforms.i386.rpm [EMAIL PROTECTED] software]# rpm -hiv lyx-1.3.6-1fc3_qt.i386.rpm Preparing...### [100%] 1:lyx### [100%] /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.64953: line 2: texhash: command not found Configuring LyX for your system... checking for a LaTeX2e program... (latex latex2e) +checking for "latex"... no +checking for "latex2e"... no checking for a LaTeX -> LyX converter... (reLyX) +checking for "reLyX"... yes checking for a Noweb -> LyX converter... (noweb2lyx) +checking for "noweb2lyx"... yes checking for a Noweb -> LaTeX converter... (noweave) +checking for "noweave"... no checking for a HTML -> Latex converter... (html2latex) +checking for "html2latex"... no checking for a MSWord -> Latex converter... (wvCleanLatex word2x) +checking for "wvCleanLatex"... no +checking for "word2x"... no checking for Image converter... (convert) +checking for "convert"... yes checking for a Postscript previewer... (gsview32 gv ghostview) +checking for "gsview32"... no +checking for "gv"... yes checking for a PDF preview... (acrobat acrord32 gsview32 acroread gv ghostview xpdf) +checking for "acrobat"... no +checking for "acrord32"... no +checking for "gsview32"... no +checking for "acroread"... no +checking for "gv"... yes checking for a DVI previewer... (xdvi windvi yap) +checking for "xdvi"... no +checking for "windvi"... no +checking for "yap"... no checking for a HTML previewer... (mozilla file://$$p$$i netscape) +checking for "mozilla"... yes checking for a PS to PDF converter... (ps2pdf13 $$i) +checking for "ps2pdf13"... yes checking for a DVI to PS converter... (dvips) +checking for "dvips"... no checking for a DVI to PDF converter... (dvipdfm) +checking for "dvipdfm"... no checking for a *roff formatter... (groff -t -Tlatin1 $$FName nroff) +checking for "groff"... yes checking for ChkTeX... (chktex -n1 -n3 -n6 -n9 -n22 -n25 -n30 -n38) +checking for "chktex"... no checking for a spell-checker... (ispell) +checking for "ispell"... yes checking for Octave... (octave) +checking for "octave"... no checking for Maple... (maple) +checking for "maple"... no checking for a fax program... (kdeprintfax ksendfax) +checking for "kdeprintfax"... yes checking for SGML-tools 1.x (LinuxDoc)... (sgml2lyx) +checking for "sgml2lyx"... yes checking for SGML-tools 2.x (DocBook) or db2x scripts... (sgmltools db2dvi) +checking for "sgmltools"... no +checking for "db2dvi"... yes checking for a spool command... (lp lpr) +checking for "lp"... yes checking for a LaTeX -> HTML converter... (tth latex2html hevea) +checking for "tth"... no +checking for "latex2html"... no +checking for "hevea"... no checking LaTeX configuration... default values +checking list of textclasses... done creating packages.lst creating doc/LaTeXConfig.lyx checking whether TeX allows spaces in file names... creating lyxrc.defaults checking for an FIG -> EPS/PPM converter... (fig2dev) +checking for "fig2dev"... no checking for an TIFF -> PS converter... (tiff2ps) +checking for "tiff2ps"... yes checking for an TGIF -> EPS/PPM converter... (tgif) +checking for "tgif"... no checking for an EPS -> PDF converter... (epstopdf) +checking for "epstopdf"... no checking for a Grace -> Image converter... (gracebat) +checking for "gracebat"... no checking for TeX fonts +checking for cmex10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmmi10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmr10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for cmsy10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no +checking for eufm10... ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found ./configure: line 1584: kpsewhich: command not found no
