Hans Hagen wrote:
taco and i need to check why the \Uprimitive approach does not work
A luatex bug: http://tracker.luatex.org/view.php?id=395
Best wishes,
Taco
___
If your question is of interest to others as
Hi,
Running the following test with the latest context (MK-IV 2010.05.13 12:15)
gives the following error.
Compiled fine with version MK-IV 2010.04.29 22:30 (side note : integral
symbols still not displaying correctly)
I was just wondering, is there a ConText test suite which I can use to test
On 13-5-2010 6:09, gummybears wrote:
Hi,
Running the following test with the latest context (MK-IV 2010.05.13 12:15)
gives the following error.
Compiled fine with version MK-IV 2010.04.29 22:30 (side note : integral
symbols still not displaying correctly)
I was just wondering, is there a
ishamid wrote:
This has been a really frustrating week...
sorry for that
i played a it with the $engine stuff in web2c and (as adam already found out for
xetex) somehow that mechanism does not work well [one can set en engine in
texmf.cnf, like
TEXFORMATS= .;$TEXMF/web2c/{$engine,}
MFBASES
Hi Hans,
= Original Message From Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] =
at the moment the best way of dealing with is is to use texexec's engine
handler;
locate texexec.ini (or rme) and set
set UseEnginePath to true
after that pdfetex, aleph, xetex, mpost etc will end up on their own path.
I
= Original Message From Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] =
ishamid wrote:
lines all over the place in my work that compiled fine with the old ConTeX,
and I suspect that XeTeX may be responsible. Is there a way to completely
isolate the new stuff because I'm going to lose a lot of time
ishamid said this at Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:30:48 -0700:
! Undefined control sequence.
\pardir #1#2#3-\global \TeXXeTstate
\plusone \if #2L\chardef
\inlinedirecti...
l.1 \pardir TLT
Oops, I think I recognize this.
This came about when Hans and I were trying to
Adam Lindsay wrote:
ishamid said this at Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:30:48 -0700:
! Undefined control sequence.
\pardir #1#2#3-\global \TeXXeTstate
\plusone \if #2L\chardef
\inlinedirecti...
l.1 \pardir TLT
Oops, I think I recognize this.
This came about when Hans and
= Original Message From Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] =
Sounds like supp-dir needs a no-Omega check, as well. Hans?
attached for testing, i dunny what the pardir equivalents are for \beginL and
\beginR -)
Ok, the new supp-dir.tex helps. But there is another problem. Now my following
= Original Message From Hans Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] =
Sounds like supp-dir needs a no-Omega check, as well. Hans?
attached for testing, i dunny what the pardir equivalents are for \beginL and
\beginR -)
Not to belabor this, but I'm getting
### simple group (level 1) entered at line
ishamid wrote:
lines all over the place in my work that compiled fine with the old ConTeX,
and I suspect that XeTeX may be responsible. Is there a way to completely
isolate the new stuff because I'm going to lose a lot of time trying to track
down every situation where my previously
Hi,
Was anyone able to look at this?
:-)
Best
Idris
On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 12:51:58 -0600, Idris Samawi Hamid
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi syndicate,
I have found a serious problem in the latest ConTeXt: when using
\rotate[]{}, \raise does not seem to work probably. Consider the
following example,
12 matches
Mail list logo
