direct search:
Tools-Preferences-Output-General
xdvi -nofork -sourceposition $$n $$t $$o -editor
lyxeditor.sh %f
%l
-nofork part is needed because of the pipe?
I guess: the point is that without -nofork if you have xdvi already open,
lyx starts a new
Fabio S. wrote:
direct search:
Tools-Preferences-Output-General
xdvi -nofork -sourceposition $$n $$t $$o -editor
lyxeditor.sh %f
%l
-nofork part is needed because of the pipe?
I guess: the point is that without -nofork if you have xdvi already open,
lyx starts a
direct search:
Tools-Preferences-Output-General
xdvi -nofork -sourceposition $$n $$t $$o -editor
lyxeditor.sh %f
%l
-nofork part is needed because of the pipe?
I guess: the point is that without -nofork if you have xdvi already open,
lyx starts a new
Fabio S. wrote:
direct search:
Tools-Preferences-Output-General
xdvi -nofork -sourceposition $$n $$t $$o -editor
lyxeditor.sh %f
%l
-nofork part is needed because of the pipe?
I guess: the point is that without -nofork if you have xdvi already open,
lyx starts a
direct search:
Tools->Preferences->Output->General
xdvi -nofork -sourceposition "$$n $$t" $$o -editor
"lyxeditor.sh %f
%l"
"-nofork" part is needed because of the pipe?
I guess: the point is that without -nofork if you have xdvi already open,
lyx
Fabio S. wrote:
> direct search:
> Tools->Preferences->Output->General
>xdvi -nofork -sourceposition "$$n $$t" $$o -editor
> "lyxeditor.sh %f
> %l"
"-nofork" part is needed because of the pipe?
>>>
>>> I guess: the point is that without
Fabio S. wrote:
direct search:
Tools-Preferences-Output-General
xdvi -nofork -sourceposition $$n $$t $$o -editor
lyxeditor.sh %f
%l
-nofork part is needed because of the pipe?
I guess: the point is that without -nofork if you have xdvi already open,
lyx
Fabio S. wrote:
direct search:
Tools-Preferences-Output-General
xdvi -nofork -sourceposition $$n $$t $$o -editor
lyxeditor.sh %f
%l
-nofork part is needed because of the pipe?
I guess: the point is that without -nofork if you have xdvi already open,
lyx
Fabio S. wrote:
>>> direct search:
>>> Tools->Preferences->Output->General
>>> xdvi -nofork -sourceposition "$$n $$t" $$o -editor
>>> "lyxeditor.sh %f
>>> %l"
>>
>> "-nofork" part is needed because of the pipe?
>
> I guess: the point is that without -nofork if you
If you can comment what and why was changed I can include it into docs as well.
ok.
xdvi:
inverse search:
Tools-Preferences-File Handling-File formats
xdvi -editor lyxeditor.sh %f %l
In the docs: xdvi -editor 'lyxeditor.sh %f %l'
With single quotes
If you can comment what and why was changed I can include it into docs as well.
ok.
xdvi:
inverse search:
Tools-Preferences-File Handling-File formats
xdvi -editor lyxeditor.sh %f %l
In the docs: xdvi -editor 'lyxeditor.sh %f %l'
With single quotes
If you can comment what and why was changed I can include it into docs as well.
ok.
xdvi:
inverse search:
Tools->Preferences->File Handling->File formats
xdvi -editor "lyxeditor.sh %f %l"
In the docs: xdvi -editor 'lyxeditor.sh %f %l'
With single
Anyway does changing the line
read ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
into
read TMP ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
work for you?
Pavel
Yes this works. Thanks.
But is there any difference with regards to simply comment it?
To answer your previous question:
yes, there is a reason for I want to use named pipe.
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
Anyway does changing the line
read ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
into
read TMP ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
work for you?
Pavel
Yes this works. Thanks.
Ok, I committed this to 2.1 docs.
But is there any difference with regards to simply comment it?
I didn't write this script
Anyway does changing the line
read ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
into
read TMP ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
work for you?
Pavel
Yes this works. Thanks.
But is there any difference with regards to simply comment it?
To answer your previous question:
yes, there is a reason for I want to use named pipe.
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
Anyway does changing the line
read ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
into
read TMP ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
work for you?
Pavel
Yes this works. Thanks.
Ok, I committed this to 2.1 docs.
But is there any difference with regards to simply comment it?
I didn't write this script
Anyway does changing the line
read < "${LYXPIPE}".out || exit
into
read TMP < "${LYXPIPE}".out || exit
work for you?
Pavel
Yes this works. Thanks.
But is there any difference with regards to simply comment it?
To answer your previous question:
yes, there is a reason for I want to use named
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
>> Anyway does changing the line
>> read < "${LYXPIPE}".out || exit
>> into
>> read TMP < "${LYXPIPE}".out || exit
>>
>> work for you?
>> Pavel
>
> Yes this works. Thanks.
Ok, I committed this to 2.1 docs.
> But is there any difference with regards to simply comment it?
I
Hi all,
I configured reverse search as explained in section 5.6.3 of the
Additional features manual.
In particular, I setted
Preferences-File Handling-File formats
to
xdvi -editor lyxeditor.sh %f %l
and I created, as suggested, a lyxeditor.sh executable file in my
$HOME/bin which contains
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
and I created, as suggested, a lyxeditor.sh
Is there reason why you want to use named pipe?
xdvi should work via sockets out of the box (almost:)
Pavel
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
Anyway does changing the line
read ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
into
read TMP ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
work for you?
Pavel
Hi all,
I configured reverse search as explained in section 5.6.3 of the
Additional features manual.
In particular, I setted
Preferences-File Handling-File formats
to
xdvi -editor lyxeditor.sh %f %l
and I created, as suggested, a lyxeditor.sh executable file in my
$HOME/bin which contains
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
and I created, as suggested, a lyxeditor.sh
Is there reason why you want to use named pipe?
xdvi should work via sockets out of the box (almost:)
Pavel
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
Anyway does changing the line
read ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
into
read TMP ${LYXPIPE}.out || exit
work for you?
Pavel
Hi all,
I configured reverse search as explained in section 5.6.3 of the
"Additional features manual".
In particular, I setted
Preferences->File Handling->File formats
to
xdvi -editor "lyxeditor.sh %f %l"
and I created, as suggested, a lyxeditor.sh executable file in my
$HOME/bin which
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
> and I created, as suggested, a lyxeditor.sh
Is there reason why you want to use named pipe?
xdvi should work via sockets out of the box (almost:)
Pavel
Fabio Stumbo wrote:
Anyway does changing the line
read < "${LYXPIPE}".out || exit
into
read TMP < "${LYXPIPE}".out || exit
work for you?
Pavel
27 matches
Mail list logo