lyx command-line
Dear Lyx developers, I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt in windows: 1) Typing LyX -help or LyX --help displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at least the error status true/false. Best regards, Mukhtar
Re: lyx command-line
On 06/13/2011 07:01 AM, Mukhtar Ullah wrote: Dear Lyx developers, I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt in windows: 1) Typing LyX -help or LyX --help displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at least the error status true/false. We need at least to know what OS you are on. rh
Re: lyx command-line
Thanks rh. My OS is Windows 7 64bit professional. On 13/06/2011 16:52, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/13/2011 07:01 AM, Mukhtar Ullah wrote: Dear Lyx developers, I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt in windows: 1) Typing LyX -help or LyX --help displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at least the error status true/false. We need at least to know what OS you are on. rh
lyx command-line
Dear Lyx developers, I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt in windows: 1) Typing LyX -help or LyX --help displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at least the error status true/false. Best regards, Mukhtar
Re: lyx command-line
On 06/13/2011 07:01 AM, Mukhtar Ullah wrote: Dear Lyx developers, I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt in windows: 1) Typing LyX -help or LyX --help displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at least the error status true/false. We need at least to know what OS you are on. rh
Re: lyx command-line
Thanks rh. My OS is Windows 7 64bit professional. On 13/06/2011 16:52, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/13/2011 07:01 AM, Mukhtar Ullah wrote: Dear Lyx developers, I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt in windows: 1) Typing LyX -help or LyX --help displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at least the error status true/false. We need at least to know what OS you are on. rh
lyx command-line
Dear Lyx developers, I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt in windows: 1) Typing LyX -help or LyX --help displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at least the error status true/false. Best regards, Mukhtar
Re: lyx command-line
On 06/13/2011 07:01 AM, Mukhtar Ullah wrote: > Dear Lyx developers, > I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt > in windows: > 1) Typing > LyX -help > or > LyX --help > displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. > But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. > > 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does > command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. > > I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a > vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at > least the error status true/false. > We need at least to know what OS you are on. rh
Re: lyx command-line
Thanks rh. My OS is Windows 7 64bit professional. On 13/06/2011 16:52, Richard Heck wrote: On 06/13/2011 07:01 AM, Mukhtar Ullah wrote: Dear Lyx developers, I have noticed two problems with LyX when run from the command prompt in windows: 1) Typing LyX -help or LyX --help displays nothing. I can still use the options such as -e and so forth. But if I forget the switches, I have lost the help. 2) Lyx does not return/display any error whatsoever. Even the does command ERRORLEVEL returns nothing. I really need help here, because I want to to export lyx math to a vector graphics on the command prompt. I a script file you need at least the error status true/false. We need at least to know what OS you are on. rh
Re: Lyx command line question
_/ On Wed 19 Oct 2005 19:42:31 BST, [Paul] wrote : \_ PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. I hope you didn't find offence in that, Paul. The trick is to use a feature/widget called Reply to list if your clients presents it. I per- sonally use Thunderbird for mail (locally) and Horde for mailing lists. Experience has taught me how to reply correctly, having made some mistakes in the past. If nobody pointed this out, you possibly would never have learned. Think of it as a gentle reminder. Best Wishes, Roy -- Roy S. Schestowitz |Useless fact: 11 X 11 = 12345654321 http://Schestowitz.com |SuSE Linux| PGP-Key: 74572E8E 7:55am up 55 days 20:09, 5 users, load average: 0.61, 0.49, 0.47 http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/20/05, Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, unfortunately, the feature reply to the list. Sounds like you should use a news reader and point it at gmane.editors.lyx.general Good idea, Angus! Thanks. Paul
Re: Lyx command line question
_/ On Wed 19 Oct 2005 19:42:31 BST, [Paul] wrote : \_ PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. I hope you didn't find offence in that, Paul. The trick is to use a feature/widget called Reply to list if your clients presents it. I per- sonally use Thunderbird for mail (locally) and Horde for mailing lists. Experience has taught me how to reply correctly, having made some mistakes in the past. If nobody pointed this out, you possibly would never have learned. Think of it as a gentle reminder. Best Wishes, Roy -- Roy S. Schestowitz |Useless fact: 11 X 11 = 12345654321 http://Schestowitz.com |SuSE Linux| PGP-Key: 74572E8E 7:55am up 55 days 20:09, 5 users, load average: 0.61, 0.49, 0.47 http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/20/05, Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, unfortunately, the feature reply to the list. Sounds like you should use a news reader and point it at gmane.editors.lyx.general Good idea, Angus! Thanks. Paul
Re: Lyx command line question
_/ On Wed 19 Oct 2005 19:42:31 BST, [Paul] wrote : \_ PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is "would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?". For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. I hope you didn't find offence in that, Paul. The trick is to use a feature/widget called "Reply to list" if your clients presents it. I per- sonally use Thunderbird for mail (locally) and Horde for mailing lists. Experience has taught me how to reply correctly, having made some mistakes in the past. If nobody pointed this out, you possibly would never have learned. Think of it as a gentle reminder. Best Wishes, Roy -- Roy S. Schestowitz |Useless fact: 11 X 11 = 12345654321 http://Schestowitz.com |SuSE Linux| PGP-Key: 74572E8E 7:55am up 55 days 20:09, 5 users, load average: 0.61, 0.49, 0.47 http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/20/05, Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and > >> then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list > >> via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the > >> list. > > > > I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems > > that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. > > Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists > > and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing > > lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, > > unfortunately, the feature "reply to the list". > > Sounds like you should use a news reader and point it at > gmane.editors.lyx.general Good idea, Angus! Thanks. Paul
Re: Lyx command line question
Geoffrey Lloyd wrote:
Yes it should but you must note that Export-Pdflatex is different to
Export-latex followed by running pdflatex on the file.
In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx-tex.
This will not convert any graphics file formats.
This is true for 1.3.x, but 1.4 converts included graphics files if needed,
and references the converted file in the .tex file. So the procedure
lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx
pdflatex mylyxfile.tex
should produce identical results to export-pdflatex from GUI, with one
exception:
lyx --export latex can not know if the produced .tex file will be run
through pdflatex or latex. It assumes latex, and this is the problem here:
The gif file is converted to eps, and the .tex file contains
'\includegraphics{foo}'. latex would find foo.eps (which was created), but
pdflatex would find foo.pdf, foo.png or foo.jpg.
So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument.
This is indeed a workaround until we have a 'pdflatex' export format.
Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
On Wednesday 19 October 2005 06:04, Roy Schestowitz wrote: That said, I can't understand why people steer away from encapsulated PostScript, which in most cases ought to be used as it preserves and incorporates vectors rather than pixels. If used properly, it is also far smaller in terms of size and results in document output that is infinitely scalable with good zooming as required. pdflatex only accepts png or pdf graphics, IIRC. And that is why lyx converts the other file formats to those for pdflatex. -- José Abílio
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
Thank you for all the contribution,
Summarized:
The latex export command line option works fine for regular latex, latex
myfile.tex generates a valid dvi file.
If you want to use pdflatex you should either:
1) edit the resulting .tex file and replace \usepackage{graphicx} with
\usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like
for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed
's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done
3) Do not use gif's but png's instead
Maarten
-Original Message-
From: Georg Baum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 8:56 AM
To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
Subject: Re: Lyx command line question
Geoffrey Lloyd wrote:
Yes it should but you must note that Export-Pdflatex is
different to
Export-latex followed by running pdflatex on the file.
In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing
is Lyx-tex.
This will not convert any graphics file formats.
This is true for 1.3.x, but 1.4 converts included graphics
files if needed, and references the converted file in the
.tex file. So the procedure
lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx
pdflatex mylyxfile.tex
should produce identical results to export-pdflatex from
GUI, with one
exception:
lyx --export latex can not know if the produced .tex file
will be run through pdflatex or latex. It assumes latex, and
this is the problem here: The gif file is converted to eps,
and the .tex file contains '\includegraphics{foo}'. latex
would find foo.eps (which was created), but pdflatex would
find foo.pdf, foo.png or foo.jpg.
So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument.
This is indeed a workaround until we have a 'pdflatex' export format.
Georg
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done basename is safer: for file in $(find . -name *.gif) do convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png done mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
Mike Meyer wrote: 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done basename is safer: for file in $(find . -name *.gif) do convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png done Hi, Mike. Hi, Maarten. One step forward (basename) but one step backward too :P You need to quote the *.gif in the find expression: for file in $(find . -name '*.gif') or the shell will perform a glob expansion to those files ending with .gif in the current directory. One additional improvement: in general, you should always quote $file or nasty things will happen when the file name contains spaces. Unfortunately, the script above is fundamentally unable to handle files with spaces. To illustrate: $ mkdir foo $ touch 'foo/bar bar.gif' $ touch 'foo/baz baz.gif' $ for file in $(find foo -name '*.gif') do echo $file done foo/bar bar.gif foo/baz baz.gif $ find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file do echo $file done foo/bar bar.gif foo/baz baz.gif The second version doesn't suffer from buffer overflow problems either. In conclusion, I'd recommend that you use find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file do pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png convert $file pngfile done (The command `...` is synonymous with $(...).) Ain't scripting a can of worms? :) Regards, Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. Paul.
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/19/05, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. Paul
[OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith wrote: On 10/19/05, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. Paul I could agree ... if I had not seen the problems it can cause. example: the MUSCLE list (smart cards) http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle First: to me this breaks the rule of least surprise. that is: if I only hit reply, not reply all, I expect to be sending only to the person who sent the originating email. The second problem: because of the way it rewrites the headers, if I hit `reply to all` it still only includes the mailing list in the to lines, even though I wanted it to give me the person's address so I could cheaply take it off the mailing list. If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. Thanks for the discussion... -- Todd Denniston Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane) Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter
Re: Lyx command line question
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. Thoe other lists are (probably) in violation of RFC-2822. You should get into the habit of hitting Reply All to reply to the list. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | PS: Please always reply to the list | | I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves | gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list | subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different | habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World | Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For | the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a | public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser | bugs that are soon to vanish. | | Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a | reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists | I've ever been on. Then you cannot have been on many lists :-) The trick with lists is to always use Reply to All (or whatever you mailer calls it.) -- Lgb
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file | do | pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png | convert $file pngfile | done Hmm... I thought thiw was usually written as a for-loop. for file in `find foo -name \*.gif` ; do pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png convert $file $pngfile done (and you forgot a '$') -- Lgb
Re: [OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
Todd Denniston wrote: I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. I could agree ... if I had not seen the problems it can cause. example: the MUSCLE list (smart cards) http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle First: to me this breaks the rule of least surprise. that is: if I only hit reply, not reply all, I expect to be sending only to the person who sent the originating email. Heh, I thought this might be a flame war topic. I guess it depends on what you're used to. Every other list I've ever been on has sent replies to the list, so it did surprise me that it didn't work that way here - I'm expecting emails from lists to have different behaviour to emails from individuals. The second problem: because of the way it rewrites the headers, if I hit `reply to all` it still only includes the mailing list in the to lines, even though I wanted it to give me the person's address so I could cheaply take it off the mailing list. My experience of lists is that 99% of the time I want to reply to the whole list, so it makes sense to me to have that as the default. If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. I've also got several duplicate replies to messages I've posted because people have sent to the list and cc'd me as well (maybe thinking I might not be subscribed). My thoughts are that if you want a reply it's courteous to be subscribed to the list, even if it's only for a short while. Sorry for the OT list pollution if this is a regular topic that comes up... But it might help with the problem of disjointed threads in the archives. Paul.
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | On 10/19/05, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | PS: Please always reply to the list | | I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves | gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list | subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different | habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World | Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For | the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a | public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser | bugs that are soon to vanish. | | Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a | reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists | I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to | the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other | people have the same problem. | | I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. From what I have seen configuration tips for mailing list recommend what we are doing here. (mailman certainly does) Me, I use 'f' for follow-up, and 'r' for reply. That is Reply to all and Reply for you outlookers. Default finger-twitch should be 'f'. -- Lgb
Re: [OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 08:32:06PM +0100, Paul wrote: My experience of lists is that 99% of the time I want to reply to the whole list, so it makes sense to me to have that as the default. If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. I've also got several duplicate replies to messages I've posted because people have sent to the list and cc'd me as well (maybe thinking I might not be subscribed). My thoughts are that if you want a reply it's courteous to be subscribed to the list, even if it's only for a short while. Sorry for the OT list pollution if this is a regular topic that comes up... But it might help with the problem of disjointed threads in the archives. From the mailman documentation: reply_goes_to_list (general): Where are replies to list messages directed? Poster is strongly recommended for most mailing lists. This option controls what Mailman does to the Reply-To: header in messages flowing through this mailing list. When set to Poster, no Reply-To: header is added by Mailman, although if one is present in the original message, it is not stripped. Setting this value to either This list or Explicit address causes Mailman to insert a specific Reply-To: header in all messages, overriding the header in the original message if necessary (Explicit address inserts the value of reply_to_address). There are many reasons not to introduce or override the Reply-To: header. One is that some posters depend on their own Reply-To: settings to convey their valid return address. Another is that modifying Reply-To: makes it much more difficult to send private replies. See `Reply-To' Munging Considered Harmful for a general discussion of this issue. See Reply-To Munging Considered Useful for a dissenting opinion. Some mailing lists have restricted posting privileges, with a parallel list devoted to discussions. Examples are `patches' or `checkin' lists, where software changes are posted by a revision control system, but discussion about the changes occurs on a developers mailing list. To support these types of mailing lists, select Explicit address and set the Reply-To: address below to point to the parallel list. The overwhelming majority of mailing lists do the right thing (IMNSHO) by leaving the Reply-To alone. Best regards, ---Kayvan -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | crown of her husband | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: Angus Leeming writes: | find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file | do | pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png | convert $file pngfile | done Hmm... I thought thiw was usually written as a for-loop. for file in `find foo -name \*.gif` ; do pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png convert $file $pngfile done Won't work when the returned files have spaces in their names. Try out my prescription in the mail you're replying to :) The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using whitespace... Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size used by for to store the list of returned list of files. google on useless use of cat or just go here: http://www.ruhr.de/home/smallo/award.html and read the dangerous backticks section. (and you forgot a '$') Right :) (And restricted the search to the foo directory rather than the original .) -- Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
Am Mittwoch, 19. Oktober 2005 20:51 schrieb Paul Smith: I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/19/05, Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, unfortunately, the feature reply to the list. Paul
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
[drifting off-topic] In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using whitespace... Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size used by for to store the list of returned list of files. Running out of argument space always triggers my xargs detector: find foo -name '*.gif' -print0 | xargs -0 -n 1 convert -f gif Which has the advantage that it will work properly on files with newlines in the name. Note that this uses my open utility symlinked as convert, not the convert command that comes with Imagemagick. That just happens to do the right thing in this case. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
| (and you forgot a '$')
|
| Right :) (And restricted the search to the foo directory rather than the
| original .)
yeah, but that was not a syntax error (kindo)
--
Lgb
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith wrote: I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, unfortunately, the feature reply to the list. Sounds like you should use a news reader and point it at gmane.editors.lyx.general -- Angus
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
Thanks. I've just learnt something.
Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Ain't scripting fun ;)
--
Angus
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
Thanks. I've just learnt something.
Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Depends on the shell. { and } are magic to csh and zsh, and need
quoting if you're using those. They aren't magic to sh, so they don't
need quoting if you're using that. I don't keep bash installed, so I
don't know if you need them with bash. As an ex-csh user, I quote them
out of habit.
But the basename invocation used by lars is wrong. It needs to be
$(basename {} .gif).png (I always use $(...); you have to to nest
command substitutions, and I find it a bit more readable). If you
leave out the .gif, you get the full filename.
Ain't scripting fun ;)
Your scripts work much better if you start them with #!/usr/bin/env python
:-).
mike
--
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question
Geoffrey Lloyd wrote:
Yes it should but you must note that Export-Pdflatex is different to
Export-latex followed by running pdflatex on the file.
In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx-tex.
This will not convert any graphics file formats.
This is true for 1.3.x, but 1.4 converts included graphics files if needed,
and references the converted file in the .tex file. So the procedure
lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx
pdflatex mylyxfile.tex
should produce identical results to export-pdflatex from GUI, with one
exception:
lyx --export latex can not know if the produced .tex file will be run
through pdflatex or latex. It assumes latex, and this is the problem here:
The gif file is converted to eps, and the .tex file contains
'\includegraphics{foo}'. latex would find foo.eps (which was created), but
pdflatex would find foo.pdf, foo.png or foo.jpg.
So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument.
This is indeed a workaround until we have a 'pdflatex' export format.
Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
On Wednesday 19 October 2005 06:04, Roy Schestowitz wrote: That said, I can't understand why people steer away from encapsulated PostScript, which in most cases ought to be used as it preserves and incorporates vectors rather than pixels. If used properly, it is also far smaller in terms of size and results in document output that is infinitely scalable with good zooming as required. pdflatex only accepts png or pdf graphics, IIRC. And that is why lyx converts the other file formats to those for pdflatex. -- José Abílio
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
Thank you for all the contribution,
Summarized:
The latex export command line option works fine for regular latex, latex
myfile.tex generates a valid dvi file.
If you want to use pdflatex you should either:
1) edit the resulting .tex file and replace \usepackage{graphicx} with
\usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like
for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed
's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done
3) Do not use gif's but png's instead
Maarten
-Original Message-
From: Georg Baum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 8:56 AM
To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
Subject: Re: Lyx command line question
Geoffrey Lloyd wrote:
Yes it should but you must note that Export-Pdflatex is
different to
Export-latex followed by running pdflatex on the file.
In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing
is Lyx-tex.
This will not convert any graphics file formats.
This is true for 1.3.x, but 1.4 converts included graphics
files if needed, and references the converted file in the
.tex file. So the procedure
lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx
pdflatex mylyxfile.tex
should produce identical results to export-pdflatex from
GUI, with one
exception:
lyx --export latex can not know if the produced .tex file
will be run through pdflatex or latex. It assumes latex, and
this is the problem here: The gif file is converted to eps,
and the .tex file contains '\includegraphics{foo}'. latex
would find foo.eps (which was created), but pdflatex would
find foo.pdf, foo.png or foo.jpg.
So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument.
This is indeed a workaround until we have a 'pdflatex' export format.
Georg
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done basename is safer: for file in $(find . -name *.gif) do convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png done mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
Mike Meyer wrote: 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done basename is safer: for file in $(find . -name *.gif) do convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png done Hi, Mike. Hi, Maarten. One step forward (basename) but one step backward too :P You need to quote the *.gif in the find expression: for file in $(find . -name '*.gif') or the shell will perform a glob expansion to those files ending with .gif in the current directory. One additional improvement: in general, you should always quote $file or nasty things will happen when the file name contains spaces. Unfortunately, the script above is fundamentally unable to handle files with spaces. To illustrate: $ mkdir foo $ touch 'foo/bar bar.gif' $ touch 'foo/baz baz.gif' $ for file in $(find foo -name '*.gif') do echo $file done foo/bar bar.gif foo/baz baz.gif $ find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file do echo $file done foo/bar bar.gif foo/baz baz.gif The second version doesn't suffer from buffer overflow problems either. In conclusion, I'd recommend that you use find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file do pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png convert $file pngfile done (The command `...` is synonymous with $(...).) Ain't scripting a can of worms? :) Regards, Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. Paul.
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/19/05, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. Paul
[OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith wrote: On 10/19/05, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. Paul I could agree ... if I had not seen the problems it can cause. example: the MUSCLE list (smart cards) http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle First: to me this breaks the rule of least surprise. that is: if I only hit reply, not reply all, I expect to be sending only to the person who sent the originating email. The second problem: because of the way it rewrites the headers, if I hit `reply to all` it still only includes the mailing list in the to lines, even though I wanted it to give me the person's address so I could cheaply take it off the mailing list. If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. Thanks for the discussion... -- Todd Denniston Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane) Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter
Re: Lyx command line question
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. Thoe other lists are (probably) in violation of RFC-2822. You should get into the habit of hitting Reply All to reply to the list. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | PS: Please always reply to the list | | I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves | gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list | subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different | habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World | Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For | the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a | public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser | bugs that are soon to vanish. | | Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a | reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists | I've ever been on. Then you cannot have been on many lists :-) The trick with lists is to always use Reply to All (or whatever you mailer calls it.) -- Lgb
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file | do | pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png | convert $file pngfile | done Hmm... I thought thiw was usually written as a for-loop. for file in `find foo -name \*.gif` ; do pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png convert $file $pngfile done (and you forgot a '$') -- Lgb
Re: [OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
Todd Denniston wrote: I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. I could agree ... if I had not seen the problems it can cause. example: the MUSCLE list (smart cards) http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle First: to me this breaks the rule of least surprise. that is: if I only hit reply, not reply all, I expect to be sending only to the person who sent the originating email. Heh, I thought this might be a flame war topic. I guess it depends on what you're used to. Every other list I've ever been on has sent replies to the list, so it did surprise me that it didn't work that way here - I'm expecting emails from lists to have different behaviour to emails from individuals. The second problem: because of the way it rewrites the headers, if I hit `reply to all` it still only includes the mailing list in the to lines, even though I wanted it to give me the person's address so I could cheaply take it off the mailing list. My experience of lists is that 99% of the time I want to reply to the whole list, so it makes sense to me to have that as the default. If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. I've also got several duplicate replies to messages I've posted because people have sent to the list and cc'd me as well (maybe thinking I might not be subscribed). My thoughts are that if you want a reply it's courteous to be subscribed to the list, even if it's only for a short while. Sorry for the OT list pollution if this is a regular topic that comes up... But it might help with the problem of disjointed threads in the archives. Paul.
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | On 10/19/05, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | PS: Please always reply to the list | | I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves | gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list | subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different | habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World | Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For | the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a | public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser | bugs that are soon to vanish. | | Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a | reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists | I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to | the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other | people have the same problem. | | I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. From what I have seen configuration tips for mailing list recommend what we are doing here. (mailman certainly does) Me, I use 'f' for follow-up, and 'r' for reply. That is Reply to all and Reply for you outlookers. Default finger-twitch should be 'f'. -- Lgb
Re: [OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 08:32:06PM +0100, Paul wrote: My experience of lists is that 99% of the time I want to reply to the whole list, so it makes sense to me to have that as the default. If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. I've also got several duplicate replies to messages I've posted because people have sent to the list and cc'd me as well (maybe thinking I might not be subscribed). My thoughts are that if you want a reply it's courteous to be subscribed to the list, even if it's only for a short while. Sorry for the OT list pollution if this is a regular topic that comes up... But it might help with the problem of disjointed threads in the archives. From the mailman documentation: reply_goes_to_list (general): Where are replies to list messages directed? Poster is strongly recommended for most mailing lists. This option controls what Mailman does to the Reply-To: header in messages flowing through this mailing list. When set to Poster, no Reply-To: header is added by Mailman, although if one is present in the original message, it is not stripped. Setting this value to either This list or Explicit address causes Mailman to insert a specific Reply-To: header in all messages, overriding the header in the original message if necessary (Explicit address inserts the value of reply_to_address). There are many reasons not to introduce or override the Reply-To: header. One is that some posters depend on their own Reply-To: settings to convey their valid return address. Another is that modifying Reply-To: makes it much more difficult to send private replies. See `Reply-To' Munging Considered Harmful for a general discussion of this issue. See Reply-To Munging Considered Useful for a dissenting opinion. Some mailing lists have restricted posting privileges, with a parallel list devoted to discussions. Examples are `patches' or `checkin' lists, where software changes are posted by a revision control system, but discussion about the changes occurs on a developers mailing list. To support these types of mailing lists, select Explicit address and set the Reply-To: address below to point to the parallel list. The overwhelming majority of mailing lists do the right thing (IMNSHO) by leaving the Reply-To alone. Best regards, ---Kayvan -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | crown of her husband | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: Angus Leeming writes: | find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file | do | pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png | convert $file pngfile | done Hmm... I thought thiw was usually written as a for-loop. for file in `find foo -name \*.gif` ; do pngfile=`basename $file .gif`.png convert $file $pngfile done Won't work when the returned files have spaces in their names. Try out my prescription in the mail you're replying to :) The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using whitespace... Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size used by for to store the list of returned list of files. google on useless use of cat or just go here: http://www.ruhr.de/home/smallo/award.html and read the dangerous backticks section. (and you forgot a '$') Right :) (And restricted the search to the foo directory rather than the original .) -- Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
Am Mittwoch, 19. Oktober 2005 20:51 schrieb Paul Smith: I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/19/05, Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, unfortunately, the feature reply to the list. Paul
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
[drifting off-topic] In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using whitespace... Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size used by for to store the list of returned list of files. Running out of argument space always triggers my xargs detector: find foo -name '*.gif' -print0 | xargs -0 -n 1 convert -f gif Which has the advantage that it will work properly on files with newlines in the name. Note that this uses my open utility symlinked as convert, not the convert command that comes with Imagemagick. That just happens to do the right thing in this case. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
| (and you forgot a '$')
|
| Right :) (And restricted the search to the foo directory rather than the
| original .)
yeah, but that was not a syntax error (kindo)
--
Lgb
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith wrote: I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, unfortunately, the feature reply to the list. Sounds like you should use a news reader and point it at gmane.editors.lyx.general -- Angus
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
Thanks. I've just learnt something.
Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Ain't scripting fun ;)
--
Angus
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
Thanks. I've just learnt something.
Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Depends on the shell. { and } are magic to csh and zsh, and need
quoting if you're using those. They aren't magic to sh, so they don't
need quoting if you're using that. I don't keep bash installed, so I
don't know if you need them with bash. As an ex-csh user, I quote them
out of habit.
But the basename invocation used by lars is wrong. It needs to be
$(basename {} .gif).png (I always use $(...); you have to to nest
command substitutions, and I find it a bit more readable). If you
leave out the .gif, you get the full filename.
Ain't scripting fun ;)
Your scripts work much better if you start them with #!/usr/bin/env python
:-).
mike
--
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question
Geoffrey Lloyd wrote:
> Yes it should but you must note that Export->Pdflatex is different to
> Export->latex followed by running pdflatex on the file.
>
> In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx->tex.
> This will not convert any graphics file formats.
This is true for 1.3.x, but 1.4 converts included graphics files if needed,
and references the converted file in the .tex file. So the procedure
lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx
pdflatex mylyxfile.tex
should produce identical results to export->pdflatex from GUI, with one
exception:
lyx --export latex can not know if the produced .tex file will be run
through pdflatex or latex. It assumes latex, and this is the problem here:
The gif file is converted to eps, and the .tex file contains
'\includegraphics{foo}'. latex would find foo.eps (which was created), but
pdflatex would find foo.pdf, foo.png or foo.jpg.
> So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument.
This is indeed a workaround until we have a 'pdflatex' export format.
Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
On Wednesday 19 October 2005 06:04, Roy Schestowitz wrote: > That said, I can't understand why people steer away from encapsulated > PostScript, which in most cases ought to be used as it preserves and > incorporates vectors rather than pixels. If used properly, it is also far > smaller in terms of size and results in document output that is infinitely > scalable with good zooming as required. pdflatex only accepts png or pdf graphics, IIRC. And that is why lyx converts the other file formats to those for pdflatex. -- José Abílio
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
Thank you for all the contribution,
Summarized:
The latex export command line option works fine for regular latex, latex
myfile.tex generates a valid dvi file.
If you want to use pdflatex you should either:
1) edit the resulting .tex file and replace \usepackage{graphicx} with
\usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like
for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed
's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done
3) Do not use gif's but png's instead
Maarten
> -Original Message-
> From: Georg Baum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 8:56 AM
> To: lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
> Subject: Re: Lyx command line question
>
>
> Geoffrey Lloyd wrote:
>
> > Yes it should but you must note that Export->Pdflatex is
> different to
> > Export->latex followed by running pdflatex on the file.
> >
> > In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing
> is Lyx->tex.
> > This will not convert any graphics file formats.
>
> This is true for 1.3.x, but 1.4 converts included graphics
> files if needed, and references the converted file in the
> .tex file. So the procedure
>
> lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx
> pdflatex mylyxfile.tex
>
> should produce identical results to export->pdflatex from
> GUI, with one
> exception:
> lyx --export latex can not know if the produced .tex file
> will be run through pdflatex or latex. It assumes latex, and
> this is the problem here: The gif file is converted to eps,
> and the .tex file contains '\includegraphics{foo}'. latex
> would find foo.eps (which was created), but pdflatex would
> find foo.pdf, foo.png or foo.jpg.
>
> > So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument.
>
> This is indeed a workaround until we have a 'pdflatex' export format.
>
>
> Georg
>
>
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like > for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed > 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done basename is safer: for file in $(find . -name *.gif) do convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png done http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
Mike Meyer wrote: >> 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like >> for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | >> sed 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done > > basename is safer: > > for file in $(find . -name *.gif) > do > convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png > done Hi, Mike. Hi, Maarten. One step forward (basename) but one step backward too :P You need to quote the *.gif in the find expression: for file in $(find . -name '*.gif') or the shell will perform a glob expansion to those files ending with ".gif" in the current directory. One additional improvement: in general, you should always quote $file or nasty things will happen when the file name contains spaces. Unfortunately, the script above is fundamentally unable to handle files with spaces. To illustrate: $ mkdir foo $ touch 'foo/bar bar.gif' $ touch 'foo/baz baz.gif' $ for file in $(find foo -name '*.gif') do echo "$file" done foo/bar bar.gif foo/baz baz.gif $ find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file do echo "$file" done foo/bar bar.gif foo/baz baz.gif The second version doesn't suffer from buffer overflow problems either. In conclusion, I'd recommend that you use find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file do pngfile=`basename "$file" .gif`.png convert "$file" "pngfile" done (The command `...` is synonymous with $(...).) Ain't scripting a can of worms? :) Regards, Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
>>> PS: Please always reply to the list > > I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves > gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list > subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different > habits. The main question to ask is "would the group or the World > Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?". For > the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a > public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser > bugs that are soon to vanish. Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. Paul.
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/19/05, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> PS: Please always reply to the list > > > > I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves > > gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list > > subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different > > habits. The main question to ask is "would the group or the World > > Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?". For > > the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a > > public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser > > bugs that are soon to vanish. > > Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a > reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists > I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to > the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other > people have the same problem. I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. Paul
[OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith wrote: > > On 10/19/05, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>> PS: Please always reply to the list > > > > > > I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves > > > gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list > > > subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different > > > habits. The main question to ask is "would the group or the World > > > Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?". For > > > the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a > > > public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser > > > bugs that are soon to vanish. > > > > Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a > > reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists > > I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to > > the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other > > people have the same problem. > > I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. > > Paul I could agree ... if I had not seen the problems it can cause. example: the MUSCLE list (smart cards) http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle First: to me this breaks the rule of least surprise. that is: if I only hit reply, not reply all, I expect to be sending only to the person who sent the originating email. The second problem: because of the way it rewrites the headers, if I hit `reply to all` it still only includes the mailing list in the to lines, even though I wanted it to give me the person's address so I could cheaply take it off the mailing list. If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. Thanks for the discussion... -- Todd Denniston Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane) Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter
Re: Lyx command line question
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a > reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists > I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to > the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other > people have the same problem. Thoe other lists are (probably) in violation of RFC-2822. You should get into the habit of hitting "Reply All" to reply to the list. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | >>> PS: Please always reply to the list | > | > I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves | > gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list | > subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different | > habits. The main question to ask is "would the group or the World | > Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?". For | > the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a | > public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser | > bugs that are soon to vanish. | | Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a | reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists | I've ever been on. Then you cannot have been on many lists :-) The trick with lists is to always use "Reply to All" (or whatever you mailer calls it.) -- Lgb
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file | do | pngfile=`basename "$file" .gif`.png | convert "$file" "pngfile" | done Hmm... I thought thiw was usually written as a for-loop. for file in `find foo -name \*.gif` ; do pngfile=`basename "$file" .gif`.png convert "$file" "$pngfile" done (and you forgot a '$') -- Lgb
Re: [OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
Todd Denniston wrote: >>I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. > > I could agree ... if I had not seen the problems it can cause. > example: the MUSCLE list (smart cards) > http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle > > First: to me this breaks the rule of least surprise. > that is: if I only hit reply, not reply all, I expect to be sending only to > the person who sent the originating email. Heh, I thought this might be a "flame war" topic. I guess it depends on what you're used to. Every other list I've ever been on has sent replies to the list, so it did surprise me that it didn't work that way here - I'm expecting emails from lists to have different behaviour to emails from individuals. > The second problem: because of the way it rewrites the headers, if I hit > `reply to all` it still only includes the mailing list in the to lines, even > though I wanted it to give me the person's address so I could cheaply take > it off the mailing list. My experience of lists is that 99% of the time I want to reply to the whole list, so it makes sense to me to have that as the default. > If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put > both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. I've also got several duplicate replies to messages I've posted because people have sent to the list and cc'd me as well (maybe thinking I might not be subscribed). My thoughts are that if you want a reply it's courteous to be subscribed to the list, even if it's only for a short while. Sorry for the OT list pollution if this is a regular topic that comes up... But it might help with the problem of disjointed threads in the archives. Paul.
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On 10/19/05, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > >>> PS: Please always reply to the list | > > | > > I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves | > > gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list | > > subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different | > > habits. The main question to ask is "would the group or the World | > > Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?". For | > > the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a | > > public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser | > > bugs that are soon to vanish. | > | > Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a | > reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists | > I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to | > the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other | > people have the same problem. | | I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. >From what I have seen configuration tips for mailing list recommend what we are doing here. (mailman certainly does) Me, I use 'f' for follow-up, and 'r' for reply. That is "Reply to all" and "Reply" for you outlookers. Default finger-twitch should be 'f'. -- Lgb
Re: [OT Mail List header rewriting ] Re: Lyx command line question
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 08:32:06PM +0100, Paul wrote: > My experience of lists is that 99% of the time I want to reply to the > whole list, so it makes sense to me to have that as the default. > > > If someone really decides to make the change, please set the rewriter to put > > both the originator and the mailing list on the reply to line. > > I've also got several duplicate replies to messages I've posted because > people have sent to the list and cc'd me as well (maybe thinking I might > not be subscribed). My thoughts are that if you want a reply it's > courteous to be subscribed to the list, even if it's only for a short while. > > Sorry for the OT list pollution if this is a regular topic that comes > up... But it might help with the problem of disjointed threads in the > archives. >From the mailman documentation: "reply_goes_to_list (general): Where are replies to list messages directed? Poster is strongly recommended for most mailing lists. This option controls what Mailman does to the Reply-To: header in messages flowing through this mailing list. When set to Poster, no Reply-To: header is added by Mailman, although if one is present in the original message, it is not stripped. Setting this value to either This list or Explicit address causes Mailman to insert a specific Reply-To: header in all messages, overriding the header in the original message if necessary (Explicit address inserts the value of reply_to_address). There are many reasons not to introduce or override the Reply-To: header. One is that some posters depend on their own Reply-To: settings to convey their valid return address. Another is that modifying Reply-To: makes it much more difficult to send private replies. See `Reply-To' Munging Considered Harmful for a general discussion of this issue. See Reply-To Munging Considered Useful for a dissenting opinion. Some mailing lists have restricted posting privileges, with a parallel list devoted to discussions. Examples are `patches' or `checkin' lists, where software changes are posted by a revision control system, but discussion about the changes occurs on a developers mailing list. To support these types of mailing lists, select Explicit address and set the Reply-To: address below to point to the parallel list." The overwhelming majority of mailing lists do the right thing (IMNSHO) by leaving the Reply-To alone. Best regards, ---Kayvan -- Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids: Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89) http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | "crown of her husband" | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Angus Leeming writes: > | find foo -name '*.gif' | while read file > | do > | pngfile=`basename "$file" .gif`.png > | convert "$file" "pngfile" > | done > Hmm... I thought thiw was usually written as a for-loop. > for file in `find foo -name \*.gif` ; do > pngfile=`basename "$file" .gif`.png > convert "$file" "$pngfile" > done Won't work when the returned files have spaces in their names. Try out my prescription in the mail you're replying to :) The problem is that "for" splits the returned list of files using whitespace... Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size used by "for" to store the list of returned list of files. google on "useless use of cat" or just go here: http://www.ruhr.de/home/smallo/award.html and read the "dangerous backticks" section. > (and you forgot a '$') Right :) (And restricted the search to the foo directory rather than the original .) -- Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
Am Mittwoch, 19. Oktober 2005 20:51 schrieb Paul Smith: > I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's address. I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
On 10/19/05, Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I agree, Paul. The reply address should be occupied by the list's > address. > > I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and > then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via > gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the > list. I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, unfortunately, the feature "reply to the list". Paul
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
[drifting off-topic] In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > The problem is that "for" splits the returned list of files using > whitespace... > > Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size > used by "for" to store the list of returned list of files. "Running out of argument space" always triggers my xargs detector: find foo -name '*.gif' -print0 | xargs -0 -n 1 convert -f gif Which has the advantage that it will work properly on files with newlines in the name. Note that this uses my "open" utility symlinked as "convert", not the "convert" command that comes with Imagemagick. That just happens to do the right thing in this case. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| The problem is that "for" splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
| > (and you forgot a '$')
|
| Right :) (And restricted the search to the foo directory rather than the
| original .)
yeah, but that was not a syntax error (kindo)
--
Lgb
Re: Lyx command line question
Paul Smith wrote: >> I don't agree. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and >> then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list >> via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the >> list. > > I ignored all those details (discussed at the site above). It seems > that it is wiser the way the mailing list is currently organized. > Since I have a GMail account exclusively dedicated to mailing lists > and considering that I do not want to keep the archives of my mailing > lists on my computer, I use webmail, which does not have, > unfortunately, the feature "reply to the list". Sounds like you should use a news reader and point it at gmane.editors.lyx.general -- Angus
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | The problem is that "for" splits the returned list of files using
> | whitespace...
>
> find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
> then (ha!)
Thanks. I've just learnt something.
Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Ain't scripting fun ;)
--
Angus
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> > | The problem is that "for" splits the returned list of files using
> > | whitespace...
> >
> > find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
> > then (ha!)
>
> Thanks. I've just learnt something.
>
> Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Depends on the shell. { and } are magic to csh and zsh, and need
quoting if you're using those. They aren't magic to sh, so they don't
need quoting if you're using that. I don't keep bash installed, so I
don't know if you need them with bash. As an ex-csh user, I quote them
out of habit.
But the basename invocation used by lars is wrong. It needs to be
$(basename {} .gif).png (I always use $(...); you have to to nest
command substitutions, and I find it a bit more readable). If you
leave out the .gif, you get the full filename.
> Ain't scripting fun ;)
Your scripts work much better if you start them with #!/usr/bin/env python
:-).
http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Lyx command line question
I try to use lyx from the command line. In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. On the commandline I get: $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx ... lot of messages but OK $ pdflatex myfile.tex ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can enter the latex question about an image not being found and the image is not there in the resulting pdf. Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? Thanks, met vriendelijke groet / kind regards, Maarten Sanders
Re: Lyx command line question
Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) wrote: I try to use lyx from the command line. In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. On the commandline I get: $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx ... lot of messages but OK $ pdflatex myfile.tex ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can enter the latex question about an image not being found and the image is not there in the resulting pdf. Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? Please open a bug report in bugzilla and attach a minimal example file + graphic that demonstrates the problem. LyX 1.4 should convert the image to a suitable format if necessary, so this looks like you have encountered a bug. Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) wrote: I try to use lyx from the command line. In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. On the commandline I get: $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx ... lot of messages but OK $ pdflatex myfile.tex ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can enter the latex question about an image not being found and the image is not there in the resulting pdf. Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? Thanks, met vriendelijke groet / kind regards, Maarten Sanders Does pdflatex not understand .gif? Ah well. Can you produce the document when you fire up the LyX GUI? Ie, is this a command line versus gui problem or is it one in which you have simply not defined the conversion process from gif - png ? Do you have ImageMagick's convert utility installed? Regards, Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): Georg/Angus, From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to take do this from the commandline, e.g.: $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx --works $ missing step?? -- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex understands This should be done automatically by LyX. $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex -- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Georg PS: Please always reply to the list
Re: Lyx command line question
- Original Message - From: Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Lyx command line question Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): Georg/Angus, From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to take do this from the commandline, e.g.: $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx --works $ missing step?? -- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex understands This should be done automatically by LyX. $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex -- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Yes it should but you must note that Export-Pdflatex is different to Export-latex followed by running pdflatex on the file. In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx-tex. This will not convert any graphics file formats. Subsequent running of pdflatex is outside of Lyx and so it will run, find the gifs and have problems. The only way around this is to use a pdflatex compatible image format in the first place. THe reason for this is the following: Within Lyx when you Export-pdflatex it converts the graphics files, then does the convert to tex with the new file extensions. However if you Export-tex the output will have the gof extensions and so regardless of what you do next pdflatex will still come across gif files unless you edit the tex file. So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument. Geoff Georg PS: Please always reply to the list
Re: Lyx command line question
_/ On Tue 18 Oct 2005 15:47:35 BST, [Geoffrey Lloyd] wrote : \_ - Original Message - From: Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Lyx command line question Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): Georg/Angus, From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to take do this from the commandline, e.g.: $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx --works $ missing step?? -- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex understands This should be done automatically by LyX. $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex -- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Yes it should but you must note that Export-Pdflatex is different to Export-latex followed by running pdflatex on the file. In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx-tex. This will not convert any graphics file formats. Subsequent running of pdflatex is outside of Lyx and so it will run, find the gifs and have problems. The only way around this is to use a pdflatex compatible image format in the first place. THe reason for this is the following: Within Lyx when you Export-pdflatex it converts the graphics files, then does the convert to tex with the new file extensions. However if you Export-tex the output will have the gof extensions and so regardless of what you do next pdflatex will still come across gif files unless you edit the tex file. So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original document. That said, I can't understand why people steer away from encapsulated PostScript, which in most cases ought to be used as it preserves and incorporates vectors rather than pixels. If used properly, it is also far smaller in terms of size and results in document output that is infinitely scalable with good zooming as required. There are free tools that manipulate .eps files. GIMP is only one among several. Xara, for example, have released an Open Source version of their vector drawing program /last week/: * http://www.xaraxtreme.org/ Geoff Georg PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. My modest opinion(s)... Roy -- Roy S. Schestowitz http://Schestowitz.com |SuSE Linux| PGP-Key: 74572E8E 5:45am up 54 days 17:59, 5 users, load average: 0.43, 0.41, 0.45 http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
Lyx command line question
I try to use lyx from the command line. In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. On the commandline I get: $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx ... lot of messages but OK $ pdflatex myfile.tex ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can enter the latex question about an image not being found and the image is not there in the resulting pdf. Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? Thanks, met vriendelijke groet / kind regards, Maarten Sanders
Re: Lyx command line question
Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) wrote: I try to use lyx from the command line. In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. On the commandline I get: $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx ... lot of messages but OK $ pdflatex myfile.tex ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can enter the latex question about an image not being found and the image is not there in the resulting pdf. Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? Please open a bug report in bugzilla and attach a minimal example file + graphic that demonstrates the problem. LyX 1.4 should convert the image to a suitable format if necessary, so this looks like you have encountered a bug. Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) wrote: I try to use lyx from the command line. In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. On the commandline I get: $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx ... lot of messages but OK $ pdflatex myfile.tex ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can enter the latex question about an image not being found and the image is not there in the resulting pdf. Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? Thanks, met vriendelijke groet / kind regards, Maarten Sanders Does pdflatex not understand .gif? Ah well. Can you produce the document when you fire up the LyX GUI? Ie, is this a command line versus gui problem or is it one in which you have simply not defined the conversion process from gif - png ? Do you have ImageMagick's convert utility installed? Regards, Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): Georg/Angus, From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to take do this from the commandline, e.g.: $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx --works $ missing step?? -- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex understands This should be done automatically by LyX. $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex -- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Georg PS: Please always reply to the list
Re: Lyx command line question
- Original Message - From: Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Lyx command line question Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): Georg/Angus, From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to take do this from the commandline, e.g.: $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx --works $ missing step?? -- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex understands This should be done automatically by LyX. $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex -- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Yes it should but you must note that Export-Pdflatex is different to Export-latex followed by running pdflatex on the file. In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx-tex. This will not convert any graphics file formats. Subsequent running of pdflatex is outside of Lyx and so it will run, find the gifs and have problems. The only way around this is to use a pdflatex compatible image format in the first place. THe reason for this is the following: Within Lyx when you Export-pdflatex it converts the graphics files, then does the convert to tex with the new file extensions. However if you Export-tex the output will have the gof extensions and so regardless of what you do next pdflatex will still come across gif files unless you edit the tex file. So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument. Geoff Georg PS: Please always reply to the list
Re: Lyx command line question
_/ On Tue 18 Oct 2005 15:47:35 BST, [Geoffrey Lloyd] wrote : \_ - Original Message - From: Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Lyx command line question Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): Georg/Angus, From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to take do this from the commandline, e.g.: $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx --works $ missing step?? -- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex understands This should be done automatically by LyX. $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex -- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Yes it should but you must note that Export-Pdflatex is different to Export-latex followed by running pdflatex on the file. In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx-tex. This will not convert any graphics file formats. Subsequent running of pdflatex is outside of Lyx and so it will run, find the gifs and have problems. The only way around this is to use a pdflatex compatible image format in the first place. THe reason for this is the following: Within Lyx when you Export-pdflatex it converts the graphics files, then does the convert to tex with the new file extensions. However if you Export-tex the output will have the gof extensions and so regardless of what you do next pdflatex will still come across gif files unless you edit the tex file. So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original document. That said, I can't understand why people steer away from encapsulated PostScript, which in most cases ought to be used as it preserves and incorporates vectors rather than pixels. If used properly, it is also far smaller in terms of size and results in document output that is infinitely scalable with good zooming as required. There are free tools that manipulate .eps files. GIMP is only one among several. Xara, for example, have released an Open Source version of their vector drawing program /last week/: * http://www.xaraxtreme.org/ Geoff Georg PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?. For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. My modest opinion(s)... Roy -- Roy S. Schestowitz http://Schestowitz.com |SuSE Linux| PGP-Key: 74572E8E 5:45am up 54 days 17:59, 5 users, load average: 0.43, 0.41, 0.45 http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
Lyx command line question
I try to use lyx from the command line. In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. On the commandline I get: $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx ... lot of messages but OK $ pdflatex myfile.tex ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can the latex question about an image not being found and the image is not there in the resulting pdf. Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? Thanks, met vriendelijke groet / kind regards, Maarten Sanders
Re: Lyx command line question
Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) wrote: > I try to use lyx from the command line. > > In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. > > On the commandline I get: > > $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx > ... lot of messages but OK > $ pdflatex myfile.tex > ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can the latex question > about an image not being found and the image is not there in the > resulting pdf. > Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? Please open a bug report in bugzilla and attach a minimal example file + graphic that demonstrates the problem. LyX 1.4 should convert the image to a suitable format if necessary, so this looks like you have encountered a bug. Georg
Re: Lyx command line question
Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) wrote: > I try to use lyx from the command line. > > In lyx 1.4pre2 preview pdflatex goes fine. > > On the commandline I get: > > $ lyx --export latex myfile.lyx > ... lot of messages but OK > $ pdflatex myfile.tex > ... goes fine except for an gif image. I can the latex > question > about an image not being found and the image is not there in the > resulting pdf. > Anyone an idea on what to do to get the image? > > Thanks, > > > met vriendelijke groet / kind regards, > Maarten Sanders Does pdflatex not understand .gif? Ah well. Can you produce the document when you fire up the LyX GUI? Ie, is this a "command line" versus "gui" problem or is it one in which you have simply not defined the conversion process from gif -> png ? Do you have ImageMagick's convert utility installed? Regards, Angus
Re: Lyx command line question
Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): > Georg/Angus, > > From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the > commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to > some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. > This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to > take do this from the commandline, e.g.: > > $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx <--works > $ missing step?? <-- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex > understands This should be done automatically by LyX. > $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex <-- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Georg PS: Please always reply to the list
Re: Lyx command line question
- Original Message - From: "Georg Baum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Angus Leeming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Lyx command line question Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): Georg/Angus, From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to take do this from the commandline, e.g.: $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx <--works $ missing step?? <-- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex understands This should be done automatically by LyX. $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex <-- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Yes it should but you must note that Export->Pdflatex is different to Export->latex followed by running pdflatex on the file. In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx->tex. This will not convert any graphics file formats. Subsequent running of pdflatex is outside of Lyx and so it will run, find the gifs and have problems. The only way around this is to use a pdflatex compatible image format in the first place. THe reason for this is the following: Within Lyx when you Export->pdflatex it converts the graphics files, then does the convert to tex with the new file extensions. However if you Export->tex the output will have the gof extensions and so regardless of what you do next pdflatex will still come across gif files unless you edit the tex file. So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original dicument. Geoff Georg PS: Please always reply to the list
Re: Lyx command line question
_/ On Tue 18 Oct 2005 15:47:35 BST, [Geoffrey Lloyd] wrote : \_ - Original Message - From: "Georg Baum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Angus Leeming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Lyx command line question Am Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 16:09 schrieb Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.): Georg/Angus, From within the GUI things work fine. It is just the conversion on the commandline that does not do the part where the gif file is converted to some format pdflatex understands. Convert is present on my system. This could be a bug but also be my understanding of the steps I need to take do this from the commandline, e.g.: $ lyx --export latex mylyxfile.lyx <--works $ missing step?? <-- some step to convert all gifs to something pdflatex understands This should be done automatically by LyX. $ pdflatex mylyxfile.tex <-- works, except for the gif There is no missing step. commandline export should produce identical results to GUI export. Yes it should but you must note that Export->Pdflatex is different to Export->latex followed by running pdflatex on the file. In the second case the only Export that Lyx is performing is Lyx->tex. This will not convert any graphics file formats. Subsequent running of pdflatex is outside of Lyx and so it will run, find the gifs and have problems. The only way around this is to use a pdflatex compatible image format in the first place. THe reason for this is the following: Within Lyx when you Export->pdflatex it converts the graphics files, then does the convert to tex with the new file extensions. However if you Export->tex the output will have the gof extensions and so regardless of what you do next pdflatex will still come across gif files unless you edit the tex file. So I recommend you use png or jpg files in the original document. That said, I can't understand why people steer away from encapsulated PostScript, which in most cases ought to be used as it preserves and incorporates vectors rather than pixels. If used properly, it is also far smaller in terms of size and results in document output that is infinitely scalable with good zooming as required. There are free tools that manipulate .eps files. GIMP is only one among several. Xara, for example, have released an Open Source version of their vector drawing program /last week/: * http://www.xaraxtreme.org/ Geoff Georg PS: Please always reply to the list I second that. I noticed a tendency to reply off-list. This leaves gaps in the mailing list archives and puts off a subset of list subscribers. css-discuss, on the contrary, adopted some different habits. The main question to ask is "would the group or the World Wide Web benefit from this response or is its scope too narrow?". For the latter, in the case of Web site critique, there needn't be a public message available as it is site-specific or refers to browser bugs that are soon to vanish. My modest opinion(s)... Roy -- Roy S. Schestowitz http://Schestowitz.com |SuSE Linux| PGP-Key: 74572E8E 5:45am up 54 days 17:59, 5 users, load average: 0.43, 0.41, 0.45 http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
Re: Problems with lyx command line in WIN32/Cygwin environment
Jose' Matos wrote: It sounds like the installation of LyX win32 lacked some module named getopt but I found getopt.py and getopt.pyc in the e:/lyx/lyx/bin/lib/ directory. getopt belongs to the standard python library so it should be there. What version of python are you using? If I remember rightly, Ruurd provided a stripped down subset of python with his Win32 lyx package. Such a strategy has proved to be fragile as lyx2lyx's capabilities and requirements have increased with subsequent releases of lyx 1.3.x, 1=x5. I would suggest that all Win32 users should throw away Ruurd's python package and get the official one from www.python.org. -- Angus
