Re: [Patch] insettext.[Ch] cleanup

The last one was indeed close to trivial. Here's the patch. - Martin Index: insettext.C === RCS file: /usr/local/lyx/cvsroot/lyx-devel/src/insets/insettext.C,v retrieving revision 1.493 diff -u -p -r1.493 insettext.C --- insettext.C 8

[Patch] insettext.[Ch] cleanup

Here's another cleanup patch. 2003-09-09 Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * insettext.[Ch]: remove drawText[XY]Offset Can these go in? They are close to trivial and everything still seems to work :-) - Martin -- Martin Vermeer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Helsinki University of Technolog

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Angus Leeming wrote: > Right. The Qt frontend takes forever to build. Fancy writing an fltk frontend > for LyX? FLTK is designed to be small and modular enough to be statically linked - the "hello" program is only 97k when co

Re: The end is nigh!

Angus Leeming wrote: > > For information, here is some information on how the total dependencies have > changed since I started this marathon session. In total, 2200 fewer > dependencies on local files. Dunno what it means in practice, but it feels > good ;-) > > CURRENT CVS > Total system depen

[patch]: making all of Buffer's variables private

...and providing the outside world with accessor functions. Ok to go in? Thereafter, I'll see if putting these variables in a pimpl reduces the dependency figures. -- Angus buffer.diff.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data

Re: Towards LyX 1.3.3 (status update #1)

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:39:09PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > - fix building with Aiksaurus 1.0 Fine john -- Khendon's Law: If the same point is made twice by the same person, the thread is over.

Re: Towards LyX 1.3.3 (status update #1)

> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: John> On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:19:17PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes John> wrote: >> You can find a list of bugs pending for 1.3.3 at URL >> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&&target_mil

Re: Towards LyX 1.3.3 (status update #1)

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:19:17PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > You can find a list of bugs pending for 1.3.3 at URL > http://bugzilla.lyx.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&&target_milestone=1.3.3 It would be really nice to see a fix for 1384, I haven

Towards LyX 1.3.3 (status update #1)

LyX 1.3.3 should have been released a long time ago, so let's get the ball rolling. Here is a list of what have been done, I think we could just release that. Any objection? JMarc -- This file describes what has been done in the preparation of LyX 1.3.3 All comments are welcome.

Re: Cygwin compile problem

Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote: > On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:52:07PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: >> Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote: >> >> > Latest CVS: >> > ../../../../lyx/src/frontends/xforms/FormFiledialog.C:121: >> > call of overloaded `tostr(uid_t&)' is ambiguous >> >> I am somewhat baffled about _why_ thi

Re: [yeqx2@yahoo.com: Re: Q: lyx-1.1.6fix4 and redhat 9]

Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote: > Anyone have any ideas for Wonil Chang? ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > Dear Kayvan, > > Thank you for your quick respnse. > > I already attempted to rebuild lyx-1.1.6fix4.src.rpm but failed. > I assume that there are some problems with binary xforms-0.88 > that compiled against gl

Re: qfont_loader.C in lyx 1.3.x

> "Dekel" == Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Dekel> As I written on lyx-users, the 1.3.x code in qfont_loader.C Dekel> does not work with QT3.2. I've ported the 1.4.0cvs code to Dekel> 1.3.x. Can I apply it ? Since it is OK for John, it is OK for me too, obviously :) Dekel> I also s

[Patch] insetcollapsable.C cleanup

Does this look OK? - Martin Index: insetcollapsable.C === RCS file: /usr/local/lyx/cvsroot/lyx-devel/src/insets/insetcollapsable.C,v retrieving revision 1.172 diff -u -p -r1.172 insetcollapsable.C --- insetcollapsable.C 8 Sep 2003 0

[yeqx2@yahoo.com: Re: Q: lyx-1.1.6fix4 and redhat 9]

Anyone have any ideas for Wonil Chang? ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - Forwarded message from Wonil Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 05:04:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Wonil Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Q: lyx-1.1.6fix4 and redhat 9 To: "Kayvan A. Sylvan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In-R

Re: Cygwin compile problem

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:52:07PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > Kayvan A. Sylvan wrote: > > > Latest CVS: > > ../../../../lyx/src/frontends/xforms/FormFiledialog.C:121: > > call of overloaded `tostr(uid_t&)' is ambiguous > > I am somewhat baffled about _why_ this is coming up now, but does the

Global dependency info

Attached is a little C++ program to extract global dependency info from the .deps database. Compile with the equivalent of: $ SRCTREE=../devel; BUILDTREE=../devel/build; $ g++ -I${SRCTREE}/boost -I${SRCTREE}/src -o collect_deps collect_deps.C -L${BUILDTREE}/src/support/.libs -lsupport -L${BUILDT

CRASH 1.4CVS

Create a table with entries, or use existing table. Try to add a row. This clears the table :( Try to close the file, discarding changes. Boom. Garst

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 02:53:00PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: > >> | Please let's keep make check for if we ever have a proper testsuite >> >> EY. Do you mean to not use make check now? > | Yeah. > >> This source testing/checking is imho also part

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 02:53:00PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: > | Please let's keep make check for if we ever have a proper testsuite > > EY. Do you mean to not use make check now? Yeah. > This source testing/checking is imho also part of a testsuite, but we I would disagree ... testsu

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 11:35:50AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: > >> (make test or make check... I don't care) > | Please let's keep make check for if we ever have a proper testsuite EY. Do you mean to not use make check now? This source testing/che

Re: qfont_loader.C in lyx 1.3.x

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 02:49:25PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote: > I've ported the 1.4.0cvs code to 1.3.x. Can I apply it ? OK by me john -- Khendon's Law: If the same point is made twice by the same person, the thread is over.

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 11:35:50AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: > (make test or make check... I don't care) Please let's keep make check for if we ever have a proper testsuite john -- Khendon's Law: If the same point is made twice by the same person, the thread is over.

qfont_loader.C in lyx 1.3.x

As I written on lyx-users, the 1.3.x code in qfont_loader.C does not work with QT3.2. I've ported the 1.4.0cvs code to 1.3.x. Can I apply it ? I also suggest releasing 1.3.3 soon, as this problem is annoying. patch.gz Description: application/gzip

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | The computer does all the work. All I have to do is type a little: > | $ time make > | [snip...] > | real31m42.847s > | user26m52.940s > | sys 2m16.440s >> > > I thought you seaid you had a fast machine? but that is both xforms > and qt right? Right. The

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> Angus> I suspect that repeated builds (devel) must introduce crap. >> Angus> Can't explain these figues otherwise. >> >> Yes, I also tend to have lots of o

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Angus> I suspect that repeated builds (devel) must introduce crap. > Angus> Can't explain these figues otherwise. > > Yes, I also tend to have lots of obsolete generated files in my build dir. > > Angus>

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >>> | You _really_ don't want to do that. To test for redundant #includes in >>> | the src directory alone took 41 minutes on my 2.7GHz machine here... >>> >>> separate make target then. >> > | Why? > > I like make targets. > (you know, make targets are allowed to run s

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> | Why? But ok: >> >> Not just for this test, but if we have situation where something >> flagged really shouldn't be. >> Sure, I think you have caught all cases. Wh

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> I suspect that repeated builds (devel) must introduce crap. Angus> Can't explain these figues otherwise. Yes, I also tend to have lots of obsolete generated files in my build dir. Angus> If you're interested, I could do a 'make ma

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | Why? But ok: > > Not just for this test, but if we have situation where something > flagged really shouldn't be. > >>> Sure, I think you have caught all cases. What this "make test" would >>> be for is _new_ changes

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >> | Current CVS: >> | $ ls -l lyx-* >> | -rwxrwxr-x1 angusangus98118911 Sep 8 01:34 lyx-qt >> | -rwxrwxr-x1 angusangus75748955 Sep 8 01:32 lyx-xforms >>> >> | $ size lyx-* >> |textdata bss

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >>> So it is less than 10%, but not bad. An what about 'du -s'? > > Angus> $ du -s devel/build/src/lyx-* 95920 devel/build/src/lyx-qt > Angus> 74056 devel/build/src/lyx-xforms > > Angus> $ du -s sep_03/build/src/lyx-* 102236 sep_03/build/src/lyx-qt > Angus> 78832 sep_

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> So it is less than 10%, but not bad. An what about 'du -s'? Angus> $ du -s devel/build/src/lyx-* 95920 devel/build/src/lyx-qt Angus> 74056 devel/build/src/lyx-xforms Angus> $ du -s sep_03/build/src/lyx-* 102236 sep_03/build/src/lyx-q

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | Current CVS: > | $ ls -l lyx-* > | -rwxrwxr-x1 angusangus98118911 Sep 8 01:34 lyx-qt > | -rwxrwxr-x1 angusangus75748955 Sep 8 01:32 lyx-xforms >> > | $ size lyx-* > |textdata bss dec hex filename > | 3319939 159160 2338

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Why? But ok: Not just for this test, but if we have situation where something flagged really shouldn't be. >> Sure, I think you have caught all cases. What this "make test" would >> be for is _new_ changes to CVS, so that we catch "regression" like >

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Angus> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: I downloaded a copy of the cvs tree > Angus> from 3 September and ran these scripts on the build dirs of it > Angus> and of current cvs. Total local dependencies reduced

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> Angus> I downloaded a copy of the cvs tree from 3 September and ran >> Angus> these scripts on the build dirs of it and of current cvs. Total >> Angus> local dependencies reduced from 63 to 57 thousand files. > >> Not bad,

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: I downloaded a copy of the cvs tree Angus> from 3 September and ran these scripts on the build dirs of it Angus> and of current cvs. Total local dependencies reduced from 63 to Angus> 57 thousand files.

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >> >>> Or in compile and link time? >> > | Ouch! >> >>> What we could do is to make these scripts (in particular if some of >>> them does not need human intervention to be correct) is to make a

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >> Or in compile and link time? > | Ouch! > >> What we could do is to make these scripts (in particular if some of >> them does not need human intervention to be correct) is to make a >> "test" target that tests the source tr

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Or in compile and link time? Ouch! > What we could do is to make these scripts (in particular if some of > them does not need human intervention to be correct) is to make a > "test" target that tests the source tree: > >- make sure that all .C files includes

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Angus> I downloaded a copy of the cvs tree from 3 September and ran > Angus> these scripts on the build dirs of it and of current cvs. Total > Angus> local dependencies reduced from 63 to 57 thousand files. > Not bad, 10%. Does it make a difference in terms of debug i

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | Angus> I downloaded a copy of the cvs tree from 3 September and ran | Angus> these scripts on the build dirs of it and of current cvs. Total | Angus> local dependencies reduced from 63

Re: And it was all worth it in the end ;-)

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> I downloaded a copy of the cvs tree from 3 September and ran Angus> these scripts on the build dirs of it and of current cvs. Total Angus> local dependencies reduced from 63 to 57 thousand files. Not bad, 10%. Does it make a differ