Re: 'make check' failing

2015-11-08 Thread Georg Baum
Scott Kostyshak wrote: > Ah yes indeed. I remember seeing that but did not make the connection. > > Would it help if I did a git bisect? Don't think so. This test is very old, and probably was never executed with C++11 std::regex in gcc before. Someone would have to find out whether the regex

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Georg Baum
Kornel Benko wrote: > Am Sonntag, 8. November 2015 um 14:57:53, schrieb Scott Kostyshak > >> >> I have just a few more items on my checklist (thanks to Vincent for the >> help) before releasing alpha. I am also waiting for access to the FTP >> (my IP needs to be whitelisted). If it takes too lon

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Georg Baum
Richard Heck wrote: > Very minor suggestion: > > +def convert_fontsettings(document): > +" Duplicate font settings " > + > +i = find_token(document.header, "\\use_non_tex_fonts ", 0) > +if i == -1: > +document.warning("Malformed LyX document: No > \\use_non_tex_fonts!") > +

Re: [LyX/master] Copy caveats from RELEASE-NOTES to UPGRADING

2015-11-08 Thread Georg Baum
Scott Kostyshak wrote: > diff --git a/UPGRADING b/UPGRADING > index 122f92d..1f410ac 100644 > --- a/UPGRADING > +++ b/UPGRADING > @@ -1,6 +1,44 @@ > -How do I upgrade my existing LyX system to version 2.1.x? > +How do I upgrade my existing LyX system to version 2.2.x? > --

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Richard Heck
On 11/08/2015 02:57 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 08:34:53PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: Scott Kostyshak wrote: Thanks for working on this, Georg. As far as I'm concerned, whatever you and Günter decide is fine with me since you two seem to be the only ones that understand wh

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Richard Heck
On 11/08/2015 02:34 PM, Georg Baum wrote: Scott Kostyshak wrote: Thanks for working on this, Georg. As far as I'm concerned, whatever you and Günter decide is fine with me since you two seem to be the only ones that understand what should happen. As far as the tests, I don't have a strong prefe

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Richard Heck
On 11/08/2015 02:34 PM, Georg Baum wrote: Scott Kostyshak wrote: Thanks for working on this, Georg. As far as I'm concerned, whatever you and Günter decide is fine with me since you two seem to be the only ones that understand what should happen. As far as the tests, I don't have a strong prefe

Re: 'make check' failing

2015-11-08 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 05:10:47PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > test-suite.log shows the following: > > > > > >LyX 2.2.0dev: src/frontends/test-suite.log > > > > >

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 09:21:34PM +0100, Kornel Benko wrote: > Am Sonntag, 8. November 2015 um 14:57:53, schrieb Scott Kostyshak > > > On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 08:34:53PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > > > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for working on this, Georg. As far as I'm concerne

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Kornel Benko
Am Sonntag, 8. November 2015 um 14:57:53, schrieb Scott Kostyshak > On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 08:34:53PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > > Thanks for working on this, Georg. As far as I'm concerned, whatever you > > > and Günter decide is fine with me since you two seem

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 08:34:53PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > Thanks for working on this, Georg. As far as I'm concerned, whatever you > > and Günter decide is fine with me since you two seem to be the only ones > > that understand what should happen. As far as the tes

Re: [patch] proof of concept for bug 9744: allow parallel configuration of TeX and non-TeX fonts

2015-11-08 Thread Georg Baum
Scott Kostyshak wrote: > Thanks for working on this, Georg. As far as I'm concerned, whatever you > and Günter decide is fine with me since you two seem to be the only ones > that understand what should happen. As far as the tests, I don't have a > strong preference. I think we should try to get t

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

2015-11-08 Thread Guenter Milde
On 2015-11-07, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Guillaume Munch wrote: >> Have a new checkbox in document settings labelled "Open with change >> tracking enabled". Then the current state of change tracking is made >> independent from this checkbox; only, if the box is checked then it will >> do as advertised b

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

2015-11-08 Thread Richard Heck
On 11/08/2015 11:16 AM, Georg Baum wrote: Richard Heck wrote: On 11/07/2015 12:36 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: Is it really a file format change? If we do not change the physical appearance of the file format, and if we do not change the document output of a certain file, is it then still

Re: #9841: Preferences specific to the user and not to the file should not be recorded in the file

2015-11-08 Thread Georg Baum
Richard Heck wrote: > On 11/07/2015 12:36 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: >> >> Is it really a file format change? If we do not change the physical >> appearance of the file format, and if we do not change the document >> output of a certain file, is it then still forbidden to change in a >> min

Re: 'make check' failing

2015-11-08 Thread Georg Baum
Scott Kostyshak wrote: > test-suite.log shows the following: > > >LyX 2.2.0dev: src/frontends/test-suite.log > > ># TOTAL: 1 ># PASS: 0 ># SKIP: 0 ># XFAIL: 0 ># FAIL: