On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:51:38AM +1000, bruce muirhead wrote:
> On 21/04/16 09:37, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:20:04AM +1000, bruce muirhead wrote:
> > > On 21/04/16 03:34, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 02:39:19PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > > > > Le 20/04/2016 14:31, bruce muirhead a écrit :
> > > > > > Clearly the problem had to be my particular debian setup.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > My first port of call was to change the window manager I have been
> > > > > > using, from xfce running on openbox to xfwm4.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This completely removed the problem, and all is now working as it
> > > > > > should, although I am at a loss in terms of knowing why openbox 
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > be a problem---it has until very recently been my desktop of choice.
> > > > > > (Obviously, some modification in the openbox version I use.)
> > > > > 
> > > > > That's pretty strange... If you ever find out why openbox does not 
> > > > > like this
> > > > > dialog, there may be something we have to fix on our side.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I have, apparently, been wasting your time, but all I can say is 
> > > > > > thank
> > > > > > you---without confirmation that the file worked, I would not have 
> > > > > > found
> > > > > > what was causing my problem.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Don't worry, it is important for us to understand those problems. 
> > > > > We've had
> > > > > several instances where weeks of head scratching lead to discover an 
> > > > > actual
> > > > > bug in our code.
> > > > 
> > > > +1 on the contrary, thank you Bruce for helping investigate this issue!
> > > > 
> > > > Even though you know the issue has to do with openbox, I think it is
> > > > important to know which change in LyX's code triggered the issue.
> > > > 
> > > > In my opinion the way to proceed is a git bisect. Now that you have git
> > > > set up and you have compiled 2.1.0, here is the procedure:
> > > > 
> > > > # will remove any extra files
> > > > git clean -xdf
> > > > git bisect start
> > > > # "good" because you cannot reproduce the bug
> > > > git bisect good 2.1.0
> > > > # "bad" because you can reproduce the bug
> > > > git bisect bad 2.2.0rc1
> > > > 
> > > > # chunk label A
> > > > # now compile and run LyX, e.g.
> > > > # use make -j4 or whatever to speed things up
> > > > # sometimes the compilation fails, see below for details on what to do
> > > > ./autogen.sh && ./configure && make && ./src/lyx
> > > > # go have a tea, watch a movie, or eat some ice cream feeling happy with
> > > > # yourself because your computer is doing important work so this is not
> > > > # wasted time.
> > > > # When LyX has compiled (if it compiled successfully), it will
> > > > # automatically start (because of the ./src/lyx) so you don't need to
> > > > # constantly check back on the terminal.
> > > > 
> > > > # now do your manual test of "can you reproduce the bug" ?
> > > > # if you do see the bug, then this is a "bad" commit and you run
> > > > # git bisect bad
> > > > # if you do not see the bug, then this is a "good commit" and you run
> > > > # git bisect good
> > > > # if you were not able to compile a certain commit, you do not know if
> > > > # it is "good" or "bad". In this case do
> > > > # git bisect skip
> > > > 
> > > > # after the above, you will be taken to a new commit to test whether
> > > > # good or bad.
> > > > # to be sure, I recommend doing the following:
> > > > # this will make sure you do a fresh compile every time.
> > > > git clean -xdf
> > > > 
> > > > # now go up to chunk label A and start again.
> > > > 
> > > > # the output that git provides, should be understandable. It will tell
> > > > # you how many times you will need to compile and test, and it will tell
> > > > # you which commit is the "bad" one.
> > > > 
> > > > Please ask on the list if you have questions.
> > > > 
> > > > Scott
> > > > 
> > > When running
> > > git bisect bad 2.2.0rc1
> > > I receive the following message:
> > > 
> > > Please, commit your changes or stash them before you can switch branches.
> > > Aborting
> > > 
> > > Please advise.
> > 
> > OK, did you make any changes to the LyX source code? If so, make sure
> > you back them up. Then, in the instructions above, add
> > 
> > git reset --hard
> > 
> > to every instruction just before every
> > git clean -xdf
> > 
> > You might need to do
> > git bisect reset
> > 
> > If you see another problem, post the output (showing if some of the
> > commands worked and where you are at in the instructions when you run
> > into the problem).
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Scott
> > 
> Ok, I started the whole process over, from the beginning, i.e., I did a
> fresh clone of the git files, and followed your procedure.
> 
> The first compilation resulted in the following version
> 
> version 2.2.0dev
> Built from git commit hash 7f0ac093
> 
> which was good. I input the command you gave, and received the following:
> 
> bruce@debian:~/lyx$ git bisect good
> Bisecting: 755 revisions left to test after this (roughly 10 steps)
> error: Your local changes to the following files would be overwritten by
> checkout:
>       po/ar.gmo
>       po/ar.po
>       po/ca.gmo
>       po/ca.po
>       po/cs.gmo
>       po/cs.po
>       po/da.gmo
>       po/da.po
>       po/de.gmo
>       po/de.po
>       po/el.gmo
>       po/el.po
>       po/en.gmo
>       po/en.po
>       po/es.gmo
>       po/es.po
>       po/eu.gmo
>       po/eu.po
>       po/fi.gmo
>       po/fi.po
>       po/fr.gmo
>       po/fr.po
>       po/gl.gmo
>       po/gl.po
>       po/he.gmo
>       po/he.po
>       po/hu.gmo
>       po/hu.po
>       po/ia.gmo
>       po/ia.po
>       po/id.gmo
>       po/id.po
>       po/it.gmo
>       po/it.po
>       po/ja.gmo
>       po/ja.po
>       po/nb.gmo
>       po/nb.po
>       po/nl.gmo
>       po/nl.po
>       po/nn.gmo
>       po/nn.po
>       po/pl.gmo
>       po/pl.po
>       po/pt_BR.gmo
>       po/pt_BR.po
>       po/pt_PT.gmo
>       po/pt_PT.po
>       po/ro.gmo
>       po/ro.po
>       po/ru.gmo
>       po/ru.po
>       po/sk.gmo
>       po/sk.po
>       po/sr.gmo
>       po/sr.po
>       po/sv.gmo
>       po/sv.po
>       po/tr.gmo
>       po/tr.po
>       po/uk.gmo
>       po/uk.po
>       po/zh_CN.gmo
>       po/zh_CN.po
>       po/zh_TW.gmo
>       po/zh_TW.po
> Please, commit your changes or stash them before you can switch branches.
> Aborting
> 
> A hard reset returns me to the already tested hash, and so achieves nothing.
> And a bisect reset returns me to 2.1.0.
> 
> Clearly there is something I need to do before inputing the "bisect good"
> command, or perhaps there is something I need to install.
> 
> In any event, without knowledge which I do not currently possess, I cannot
> continue.

Try doing the "git reset --hard" before "git bisect good".

Scott

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to