I am happy to say that my problem is solved in rc3: labelled equations are now
correctly previewed when I use my favorite hyperref call.
Thank you everybody,
Jean Kaplan
Le 1 avr. 2011 à 16:33, Julien Rioux a écrit :
On 01/04/2011 5:52 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
The problems appears to be linked
I am happy to say that my problem is solved in rc3: labelled equations are now
correctly previewed when I use my favorite hyperref call.
Thank you everybody,
Jean Kaplan
Le 1 avr. 2011 à 16:33, Julien Rioux a écrit :
> On 01/04/2011 5:52 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
>> The problems appears to be
Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:45:28PM +0200, venom00 wrote:
do you remember my fear of only one man understands this
code situation in the
very beginning? :)
Well, Enrico made useful comments about the code. There
were a pair of stupid
errors,
venom00 wrote:
we are eagerly waiting for the patch :)
Here it is. I've added a general, step-by-step description of what the script
does to the top of the files and some comments here and there. I've moved out
of
main functions some code so it's more readable and fixed the FIXME I put
Pavel Sanda wrote:
thanks for your efforts, i'll put it in.
but only after you post this patch as an attachment,
its unapplicable in this form...
pavel
Pavel Sanda wrote:
thanks for your efforts, i'll put it in.
but only after you post this patch as an attachment,
its unapplicable in this form...
pavel
You're welcome. I forgot to attach it.
venom00
Index: lib/scripts/lyxpreview2bitmap.py
venom00 wrote:
Pavel Sanda wrote:
thanks for your efforts, i'll put it in.
but only after you post this patch as an attachment,
its unapplicable in this form...
pavel
You're welcome. I forgot to attach it.
its in. p
venom00 wrote:
Pavel Sanda wrote:
thanks for your efforts, i'll put it in.
but only after you post this patch as an attachment,
its unapplicable in this form...
pavel
You're welcome. I forgot to attach it.
its in. P
So what's the final decision? Will it be in 2.0?
venom00 wrote:
its in. P
So what's the final decision? Will it be in 2.0?
its in means it has been committed into trunk, ie it will appear in the next
release.
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/38256
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/38243
pavel
> Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:45:28PM +0200, venom00 wrote:
> >
> > > > do you remember my fear of "only one man understands this
> > > > code" situation in the
> > > > very beginning? :)
> > >
> > > Well, Enrico made useful comments about the code. There
> were a
venom00 wrote:
> > we are eagerly waiting for the patch :)
>
> Here it is. I've added a general, step-by-step description of what the script
> does to the top of the files and some comments here and there. I've moved out
> of
> main functions some code so it's more readable and fixed the FIXME I
Pavel Sanda wrote:
> thanks for your efforts, i'll put it in.
but only after you post this patch as an attachment,
its unapplicable in this form...
pavel
> Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > thanks for your efforts, i'll put it in.
>
> but only after you post this patch as an attachment,
> its unapplicable in this form...
> pavel
You're welcome. I forgot to attach it.
venom00
Index: lib/scripts/lyxpreview2bitmap.py
venom00 wrote:
> > Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > > thanks for your efforts, i'll put it in.
> >
> > but only after you post this patch as an attachment,
> > its unapplicable in this form...
> > pavel
>
> You're welcome. I forgot to attach it.
its in. p
> venom00 wrote:
> > > Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > > > thanks for your efforts, i'll put it in.
> > >
> > > but only after you post this patch as an attachment,
> > > its unapplicable in this form...
> > > pavel
> >
> > You're welcome. I forgot to attach it.
>
> its in. P
So what's the final
venom00 wrote:
> > its in. P
>
> So what's the final decision? Will it be in 2.0?
"its in" means it has been committed into trunk, ie it will appear in the next
release.
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/38256
http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/38243
pavel
venom00 wrote:
Sorry I read too fast. That message about xeCJK is targeted
at 1.6.9, so
unrelated.
I'm honestly not sure what to do for the preview. I don't
understand all
of the new code, but I also could not make it fail. I do feel that
venom00 is committed to be around and
On 04/04/2011 7:41 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
i see, Julien please put it in.
Committed at r38243
Cheers,
Julien
venom00 wrote:
Sorry I read too fast. That message about xeCJK is targeted
at 1.6.9, so
unrelated.
I'm honestly not sure what to do for the preview. I don't
understand all
of the new code, but I also could not make it fail. I do
feel that
venom00 is committed to be
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:45:28PM +0200, venom00 wrote:
do you remember my fear of only one man understands this
code situation in the
very beginning? :)
Well, Enrico made useful comments about the code. There were a pair of stupid
errors, Julien didn't notice them, so maybe he gave a
Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:45:28PM +0200, venom00 wrote:
do you remember my fear of only one man understands this
code situation in the
very beginning? :)
Well, Enrico made useful comments about the code. There were a pair of
stupid
errors, Julien
venom00 wrote:
> > Sorry I read too fast. That message about xeCJK is targeted
> > at 1.6.9, so
> > unrelated.
> >
> > I'm honestly not sure what to do for the preview. I don't
> > understand all
> > of the new code, but I also could not make it fail. I do feel that
> > venom00 is committed
On 04/04/2011 7:41 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
i see, Julien please put it in.
Committed at r38243
Cheers,
Julien
> venom00 wrote:
> > > Sorry I read too fast. That message about xeCJK is targeted
> > > at 1.6.9, so
> > > unrelated.
> > >
> > > I'm honestly not sure what to do for the preview. I don't
> > > understand all
> > > of the new code, but I also could not make it fail. I do
> feel that
> > >
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:45:28PM +0200, venom00 wrote:
> > do you remember my fear of "only one man understands this
> > code" situation in the
> > very beginning? :)
>
> Well, Enrico made useful comments about the code. There were a pair of stupid
> errors, Julien didn't notice them, so
Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:45:28PM +0200, venom00 wrote:
>
> > > do you remember my fear of "only one man understands this
> > > code" situation in the
> > > very beginning? :)
> >
> > Well, Enrico made useful comments about the code. There were a pair of
> > stupid
Julien Rioux wrote:
(to devs: either we go ahead on the latest patch from venom00, or we might
consider reverting to 1.6 mechanism)
whats the better solution?
pavel
On 02/04/2011 8:36 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Julien Rioux wrote:
(to devs: either we go ahead on the latest patch from venom00, or we might
consider reverting to 1.6 mechanism)
whats the better solution?
pavel
Perhaps the revert, since more problems appear: problem with xeCJK,
recently on
On 02/04/2011 10:46 AM, Julien Rioux wrote:
On 02/04/2011 8:36 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Julien Rioux wrote:
(to devs: either we go ahead on the latest patch from venom00, or we
might
consider reverting to 1.6 mechanism)
whats the better solution?
pavel
Perhaps the revert, since more
Sorry I read too fast. That message about xeCJK is targeted
at 1.6.9, so
unrelated.
I'm honestly not sure what to do for the preview. I don't
understand all
of the new code, but I also could not make it fail. I do feel that
venom00 is committed to be around and help in fixing
Julien Rioux wrote:
> (to devs: either we go ahead on the latest patch from venom00, or we might
> consider reverting to 1.6 mechanism)
whats the better solution?
pavel
On 02/04/2011 8:36 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Julien Rioux wrote:
(to devs: either we go ahead on the latest patch from venom00, or we might
consider reverting to 1.6 mechanism)
whats the better solution?
pavel
Perhaps the revert, since more problems appear: problem with xeCJK,
recently on
On 02/04/2011 10:46 AM, Julien Rioux wrote:
On 02/04/2011 8:36 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Julien Rioux wrote:
(to devs: either we go ahead on the latest patch from venom00, or we
might
consider reverting to 1.6 mechanism)
whats the better solution?
pavel
Perhaps the revert, since more
> Sorry I read too fast. That message about xeCJK is targeted
> at 1.6.9, so
> unrelated.
>
> I'm honestly not sure what to do for the preview. I don't
> understand all
> of the new code, but I also could not make it fail. I do feel that
> venom00 is committed to be around and help in fixing
Dear Julien
The problems appears to be linked with my use of a specific call to hyperref
\usepackage[colorlinks=true, pdfstartview=FitV, linkcolor=blue, citecolor=blue,
urlcolor=blue]{hyperref}
If I use the Lyx call to Hyperref in Lyx preferences instead, the problem
disapears but I come into
On 01/04/2011 5:52 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
The problems appears to be linked with my use of a specific call to hyperref
\usepackage[colorlinks=true, pdfstartview=FitV, linkcolor=blue, citecolor=blue,
urlcolor=blue]{hyperref}
If I use the Lyx call to Hyperref in Lyx preferences instead, the
Dear Julien
The problems appears to be linked with my use of a specific call to hyperref
\usepackage[colorlinks=true, pdfstartview=FitV, linkcolor=blue, citecolor=blue,
urlcolor=blue]{hyperref}
If I use the Lyx call to Hyperref in Lyx preferences instead, the problem
disapears but I come into
On 01/04/2011 5:52 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
The problems appears to be linked with my use of a specific call to hyperref
\usepackage[colorlinks=true, pdfstartview=FitV, linkcolor=blue, citecolor=blue,
urlcolor=blue]{hyperref}
If I use the Lyx call to Hyperref in Lyx preferences instead, the
On 03/30/2011 10:04 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
I work on macbook pro intel with system mac os 10.6.6
Labelled equations, and only them, always stay in the editing mode (appearing
blue on the screen and different from their appearance in the latex result).
This does not affect the latex typesetting
On 30/03/2011 10:29 AM, Richard Heck wrote:
On 03/30/2011 10:04 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
I work on macbook pro intel with system mac os 10.6.6
Labelled equations, and only them, always stay in the editing mode
(appearing blue on the screen and different from their appearance in
the latex
On 30/03/2011 10:04 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
I work on macbook pro intel with system mac os 10.6.6
Labelled equations, and only them, always stay in the editing mode (appearing
blue on the screen and different from their appearance in the latex result).
This does not affect the latex typesetting
On 30/03/2011 12:11 PM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
Le 30 mars 2011 à 16:37, Julien Rioux a écrit :
On 30/03/2011 10:04 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
I work on macbook pro intel with system mac os 10.6.6
Labelled equations, and only them, always stay in the editing mode (appearing
blue on the screen and
On 03/30/2011 10:04 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
I work on macbook pro intel with system mac os 10.6.6
Labelled equations, and only them, always stay in the editing mode (appearing
blue on the screen and different from their appearance in the latex result).
This does not affect the latex typesetting
On 30/03/2011 10:29 AM, Richard Heck wrote:
On 03/30/2011 10:04 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
I work on macbook pro intel with system mac os 10.6.6
Labelled equations, and only them, always stay in the editing mode
(appearing blue on the screen and different from their appearance in
the latex
On 30/03/2011 10:04 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
I work on macbook pro intel with system mac os 10.6.6
Labelled equations, and only them, always stay in the editing mode (appearing
blue on the screen and different from their appearance in the latex result).
This does not affect the latex typesetting
On 30/03/2011 12:11 PM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
Le 30 mars 2011 à 16:37, Julien Rioux a écrit :
On 30/03/2011 10:04 AM, Jean Kaplan wrote:
I work on macbook pro intel with system mac os 10.6.6
Labelled equations, and only them, always stay in the editing mode (appearing
blue on the screen and
46 matches
Mail list logo
