Re: [Edmar Wienskoski Jr ] "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
Edmar> Hi Lars. I worked on the literate programming extension for LyX Edmar> a while back (LyX-1.0.1). Unfortunately political trends here Edmar> at my job shifted and it is a long time I don't have Edmar> opportunity to use this feature. Hi Edmar, nice to hear from you again. Edmar> Anyway... If Edmar> you forgive me the abuse, I am enclosing a tar file with the 3 Edmar> files that I changed (based on the 1.1.5fix1 release): Edmar> lib/examples/Literate.lyx src/Literate.C src/Literate.h Would Edmar> you integrate these changes for me ? Thanks I have finally integrated these changes for the upcoming 1.1.5fix2 (things are much different in 1.1.6, and the problem is solved there too). JMarc
Re: [Edmar Wienskoski Jr ] "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lars> Hi Lars. I worked on the literate programming extension for LyX Lars> a while back (LyX-1.0.1). Unfortunately political trends here at Lars> my job shifted and it is a long time I don't have opportunity to Lars> use this feature. Then, on July one guy sent me email saying it Lars> was broken. In fact it was, but it is a small thing: If you get Lars> compilation errors, the errors were not shown on the document. Lars> (The reason this bug was introduced is that the parsing of the Lars> latex log file changed, and the corresponding parsing routine Lars> for literate programming building process were not.) So, what happened with this patch? Has it been applied? Should I apply it to the fix branch? I'd like to know what literate people think about it. JMarc
Re: "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Juergen Vigna wrote: > On 18-Sep-2000 Allan Rae wrote: > > > > I'm sure we've had more than occasion where contributors have forgotten > > those new files simply because they expected diff would add the new files > > to the patch for them. Sure they should have checked their patch and > > noticed this but getting a patch and a tarball is a pain. Why not get a > > patch from everyone? The modified diffutils provides a way for that. > > > > I never said that I just said that we didn't reject patches with newfiles > added as tar-ball, as you suggested in an earlier mail! I didn't mention the "newfiles-in-a-tarball". In fact you said something to John about rejecting patches (although that may have simply been referring to the lack of a ChangeLog) even though the discussion then led to find a way for him to send a patch and no tarball. > > So we make life easier for some who've proven worthy and others just have > > to struggle. I wish it was friday then I could leave out the smiley's ;-) > > NO, they can use your patched diffutils!!! (When they convice their system > administrator that they are really the top of developement, secure and VERY > handy ;)! Or they can install them in their ~/bin. 256K compressed code and an installed footprint of around 500KB if all diffutils components (docs, executables etc.) are installed and are statically linked to the helper code now shipped in glibc but also included in the diffutils distro (this is the default and would require a patch to diffutils configure to fix this). > >> I understand that you want publicity for your patched diff-utils! > > > > Gotta start somewhere. > > BTW.: Could you provide a RPM for Redhat 6.x? I think I could use them, but > I'm a bit lazy #:O) Maybe. What's wrong with just using the source tree (apart from a misnamed link?). Correct links are now at: http://www.devel.lyx.org/~rae/code/ Allan. (ARRae)
Re: "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
On 18-Sep-2000 Allan Rae wrote: > > I'm sure we've had more than occasion where contributors have forgotten > those new files simply because they expected diff would add the new files > to the patch for them. Sure they should have checked their patch and > noticed this but getting a patch and a tarball is a pain. Why not get a > patch from everyone? The modified diffutils provides a way for that. > I never said that I just said that we didn't reject patches with newfiles added as tar-ball, as you suggested in an earlier mail! > So we make life easier for some who've proven worthy and others just have > to struggle. I wish it was friday then I could leave out the smiley's ;-) > NO, they can use your patched diffutils!!! (When they convice their system administrator that they are really the top of developement, secure and VERY handy ;)! >> I understand that you want publicity for your patched diff-utils! > > Gotta start somewhere. BTW.: Could you provide a RPM for Redhat 6.x? I think I could use them, but I'm a bit lazy #:O) Jürgen -- -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Italienallee 13/N Tel/Fax: +39-0471-450260 / +39-0471-450253 I-39100 Bozen Web: http://www.sad.it/~jug -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow.
Re: "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Juergen Vigna wrote: > > > > Nothing, as I said above in the first case. The only problem comes with > > the fact that new files are not included by the -N. Only new files that > > have been added to cvs using `cvs add` are actually caught by the -N flag. > > To be able to run `cvs add` you have to be given at least read-only access > > to cvs by Lars. This just means extra work for Lars and extra hassle for > > budding contributors just to be able to submit a patch that will be in an > > acceptable form. This is a silly requirement IMO as it is overly > > restrictive. > > Well I guess you didn't get enough sleep last night, isn't it! > > I've never seen that a patch as John sends them with a cvs diff -u and > the newfiles in a tar-ball are rejected, I'm sure we've had more than occasion where contributors have forgotten those new files simply because they expected diff would add the new files to the patch for them. Sure they should have checked their patch and noticed this but getting a patch and a tarball is a pain. Why not get a patch from everyone? The modified diffutils provides a way for that. > I've only seen requests to Lars > to add some of the "not fast disapearing developers" to the cvs-readonly > list so that is is easier for them to do a cvs diff and include also the > newfiles (and deleted files) in the patch! So we make life easier for some who've proven worthy and others just have to struggle. I wish it was friday then I could leave out the smiley's ;-) > I understand that you want publicity for your patched diff-utils! Gotta start somewhere. Allan. (ARRae)
Re: "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
> > Nothing, as I said above in the first case. The only problem comes with > the fact that new files are not included by the -N. Only new files that > have been added to cvs using `cvs add` are actually caught by the -N flag. > To be able to run `cvs add` you have to be given at least read-only access > to cvs by Lars. This just means extra work for Lars and extra hassle for > budding contributors just to be able to submit a patch that will be in an > acceptable form. This is a silly requirement IMO as it is overly > restrictive. Well I guess you didn't get enough sleep last night, isn't it! I've never seen that a patch as John sends them with a cvs diff -u and the newfiles in a tar-ball are rejected, I've only seen requests to Lars to add some of the "not fast disapearing developers" to the cvs-readonly list so that is is easier for them to do a cvs diff and include also the newfiles (and deleted files) in the patch! I understand that you want publicity for your patched diff-utils! Jürgen #:OP -- -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ Dr. Jürgen VignaE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Italienallee 13/N Tel/Fax: +39-0471-450260 / +39-0471-450253 I-39100 Bozen Web: http://www.sad.it/~jug -._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._-._ It seems intuitively obvious to me, which means that it might be wrong. -- Chris Torek
Re: "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Garst R. Reese wrote: > Allan Rae wrote: > > > So in summary: > > If you have cvs access but no new files use > > `cvs diff -p -N -u` > > > > if you have no cvs access (using snapshots or releases) _or_ have cvs > > access but have added new files then get the modified diff and a script > > called packcvs from the above site and run: > > packcvs > > > > Allan. (ARRae) > What was wrong with cvs diff -N -u > mypatch.diff > and sending mypatch.diff to the list? Nothing, as I said above in the first case. The only problem comes with the fact that new files are not included by the -N. Only new files that have been added to cvs using `cvs add` are actually caught by the -N flag. To be able to run `cvs add` you have to be given at least read-only access to cvs by Lars. This just means extra work for Lars and extra hassle for budding contributors just to be able to submit a patch that will be in an acceptable form. This is a silly requirement IMO as it is overly restrictive. Allan. (ARRae)
Re: "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
Allan Rae wrote: > So in summary: > If you have cvs access but no new files use > `cvs diff -p -N -u` > > if you have no cvs access (using snapshots or releases) _or_ have cvs > access but have added new files then get the modified diff and a script > called packcvs from the above site and run: > packcvs > > Allan. (ARRae) What was wrong with cvs diff -N -u > mypatch.diff and sending mypatch.diff to the list? Garst
"LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
My question is how we submit patches nowadays. I couldn't find the familiar script to diff two source trees... (Yeah, it's being a long time...) Makepatch doesn't exist anymore. Everyone is expected to use cvs to build patches against the latest cvs not against fix releases. Although if you do both (fix release and current) you will make JMarc's job easier. There are some problems with requiring patch submitters to use cvs. This is really only a problem with new files. I have written a patch for GNU diffutils-2.7 to get it to emulate `cvs diff`. This makes diff do similar stuff to what makepatch tried to do but isn't capable of handling with the new cvs-based development. I also have a shell script that you can call so you don't have to remember which options you should give to diff. I have these at: http://www.devel.lyx.org/~rae/code/ So in summary: If you have cvs access but no new files use `cvs diff -p -N -u` if you have no cvs access (using snapshots or releases) _or_ have cvs access but have added new files then get the modified diff and a script called packcvs from the above site and run: packcvs Allan. (ARRae)
[Edmar Wienskoski Jr ] "LyX/Literate programming" bug report and fix
Hi Lars. I worked on the literate programming extension for LyX a while back (LyX-1.0.1). Unfortunately political trends here at my job shifted and it is a long time I don't have opportunity to use this feature. Then, on July one guy sent me email saying it was broken. In fact it was, but it is a small thing: If you get compilation errors, the errors were not shown on the document. (The reason this bug was introduced is that the parsing of the latex log file changed, and the corresponding parsing routine for literate programming building process were not.) He told me he was going to fix it. But last week I downloaded the latest version of LyX, and this problem was still there. So I fixed it myself. The fix was easy, mostly cut and paste from scanLogFile LaTeX routine into scanLiterateLogFile. My question is how we submit patches nowadays. I couldn't find the familiar script to diff two source trees... (Yeah, it's being a long time...) Anyway... If you forgive me the abuse, I am enclosing a tar file with the 3 files that I changed (based on the 1.1.5fix1 release): lib/examples/Literate.lyx src/Literate.C src/Literate.h Would you integrate these changes for me ? Thanks Edmar W. Jr. -- /*--*/ /* Edmar Wienskoski Jr. - [EMAIL PROTECTED] */ /* - http://www.cs.rice.edu/~wiensk */ /*--*/ | [] | __()_||_ ---++--- | [] | | | | | | | | | | | ___| | |_|__|_| |__| |__| |__| |__\ "o-o o-o""o-o o-o""o-o o-o""o-o o-o""o-o O-O-O o-o " litfix.tar.gz
