Am Sonntag, 2. April 2006 17:26 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> Well, I think that I cannot hardcode a format in external_path as
> this would be a regression.
The fixes should go to 1.5svn first, and IMO it is acceptable if 1.5svn is
temporarily broken in that aspect, so I would not care about that too
much as long as it is only temporarily. I really think that it is useful
to proceed step by step.
> Indeed, currently the external format
> is dictated by the cygwin_path_fix switch. If I do that, suddenly
> a user can find that its external application doesn't work
> anymore because it was expecting a given path style.
>
> So, for the moment I will not change the current semantics.
This will be impossible if you introduce a new boolean and connect the
checkbox to that.
> Come on, Georg, there are many choices by the configure script
> that cannot be undone by the user! Think about dvipng which once
> detected dictates the instant-preview image formats, and if it
> doesn't work correctly (how already reported and how also
> happened to me) no previews are generated.
This can easily be changed via the preferences. Simply delete the
lyxpreview->png converter, and the old conversion without dvipng will be
used. This is not intuitive, but the possibility exists. I am not aware
of any rc setting that is done by the configure script but can't be
changed through the preferences.
> > representation for the user. Do you have other reasons why using
> > backslashes in external_path() would hurt?
>
> Yes, I have. If a user needs writing a wrapper Bourne shell
> script, he must be very careful because, if not using proper
> quoting, a backslash in a path can be more dangerous than a path
> with spaces.
I can imagine that.
> The fact that forward slashes work in external paths is proved by
> my daily use of it and the fact that no problems related to it
> have been reported so far. As I already said, even notepad and
> word do with forward slashes. So, if it was depending on me, I
> had avoided using backslashes even in the native win32 version.
> But I understand that in that case a wrapper script would be a
> .bat file, so it is better to have proper win32 paths for the
> fact that some stupid cmd.exe command could exchange them as a
> switch introducer ('/' is used in win32 in the same way '-' is
> used in *nix).
If you are so sure that forward slashes will work, do that, but I would
not be surprised at all if users report problems with certain programs.
Georg
