curtis osterhoudt wrote:
Have you tried NOT including the '.tex' extension on the \input{} command, whether or not you're using a relative path? If I remember correctly, you have to leave that bit off (for which reason I don't know, but that's how TeX expects it). Include everything else, though.

Yes, I have tried it and it did not work. TeX I do not know, however, LaTeX and pdfLaTeX understand perfectly \input{foo.tex} and as I said before running pdflatex on the tex file exported from lyx-2.0.1 from a terminal works (with relative path and extension tex to the preamble file)

Thank you very much for your comment Curtis
Best regards
Oscar

    On Thu 20 Oct 2011 05:25:57 PM EEST, Oscar Lopez wrote:
    > Dear LyXers
    >
    > I have recenty updated my lyx version to lyx 2.0.1 and I have
    found that
    > using relative paths to tex files at the lyx preamble does not
    work anymore.
    >
    > I have directory structures where lyx files are at some
    directories, bib
    > files at other, latex preamble commands at othes, and so on ...
    The lyx
    > preamble contains some input commands to take the corresponding
    latex
    > preamble, i.e.
    > \input{../common/preamble.tex}.
    >
    > In this way I can share project directories with other
    colleagues (for
    > instance using svn). We always use relative paths in order to
    ensure that the
    > compilation does not break.
    >
    > Now when I am trying to compile some documents from lyx 1.6.10 I
    have found
    > that lyx 2.0.1 stops the compilation saying
    > LaTeX Error: File `../common/preamble.tex' not found
    >
    > If I export the latex file using Export->latex (pdflatex) and
    from a terminal
    > I run pdflatex:
    > $pdflatex test.tex
    >
    > everything is ok!
    >
    > Attached to this message you can find a minimal example showing
    the problem.
    > Look at the file located at test/doc/test.lyx and try to
    pdflatex it from lyx
    > and after from a terminal.
    >
    > Please has something changed regarding the treatment that lyx
    gibes to
    > absolute versus relative paths? Hope not! I am completely
    puzzled with this
    > behaviour and perhaps I am missing something evident.
    >
    > Best regards
    > TIA
    > Oscar
    >
    >
    >





Reply via email to