On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 08:24:43AM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 09:49:08PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> >
> > Attached is a patch. I really don't know what I'm doing. The use of
> > calloc scares me. I just used the xcb_send_event man page and
> > experimented until
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 09:49:08PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> Could anyone take a close look at this? If there is a better fix, please
> go ahead.
Looks OK to me.
I would just put into comments TODO to switch to
Q_DECLARE_XCB_EVENT(event, xcb_selection_notify_event_t); once we require qt >=
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 09:49:08PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>
> Attached is a patch. I really don't know what I'm doing. The use of
> calloc scares me. I just used the xcb_send_event man page and
> experimented until compilation and valgrind did not complain.
>
> Could anyone take a close lo
I was trying to look into #11715 and came across the following Valgrind error:
==12698== Syscall param writev(vector[...]) points to uninitialised byte(s)
==12698==at 0x61F578D: __writev (writev.c:26)
==12698==by 0x61F578D: writev (writev.c:24)
==12698==by 0x4A83BFC: ??? (in /u
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 07:33:39PM -0500, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> On 2/18/20 6:07 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > Valgrind gave me the following error:
> >
> > ==732== 112 (72 direct, 40 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely
> > lost in loss record 5,165 of 5,862
> > ==732==at 0
On 2/18/20 6:07 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> Valgrind gave me the following error:
>
> ==732== 112 (72 direct, 40 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost
> in loss record 5,165 of 5,862
> ==732==at 0x483AE63: operator new(unsigned long) (in
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/valgrind/vgp
Valgrind gave me the following error:
==732== 112 (72 direct, 40 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in
loss record 5,165 of 5,862
==732==at 0x483AE63: operator new(unsigned long) (in
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==732==by 0x103A
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 07:36:54PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 09:43:07AM +0100, Stephan Witt wrote:
> >
> > Because I’m unable to test it with other PDF viewers with SyncTeX
> > support and/or to test it on Linux and Windows I post the patch
> > and it would be nice
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 09:43:07AM +0100, Stephan Witt wrote:
>
> Because I’m unable to test it with other PDF viewers with SyncTeX
> support and/or to test it on Linux and Windows I post the patch
> and it would be nice if you can test if it breaks something used
> to work.
It works for me on li
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 02:26:17PM -0500, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> On 2/17/20 2:08 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 12:35:19PM -0500, Richard Kimberly Heck wrote:
> >> On 2/17/20 8:17 AM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 07:21:17PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak
Am Dienstag, den 18.02.2020, 08:37 +0100 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> While we are at it - I think it’s a feature and not a bug:
> the change in preferences is not applied until next restart.
>
> The preferences dialog suggests another behavior. The checkbox
> „Apply to current session only“ makes one
Am Di., 18. Feb. 2020 um 11:23 Uhr schrieb Sivan Frenkel <
sivanfren...@yahoo.com>:
> Hi,
>
> I am using Win10 and have just updated from version 2.3.4 to 2.3.4.3. The
> update did solve the delay in saving, but seems to have created a new bug.
>
> The bug interferes with the use of "view" command
Hi,
I am using Win10 and have just updated from version 2.3.4 to 2.3.4.3. The
update did solve the delay in saving, but seems to have created a new bug.
The bug interferes with the use of "view" command. I am using Adobe Reader to
views PDF files (I am using Adobe Reader DC version 2020.006.20034
Am Sa., 15. Feb. 2020 um 18:38 Uhr schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck <
rikih...@lyx.org>:
> FYI, I updated ImageMagick in the most recent installers. I haven't
> uploaded the new stuff yet to the dependencies file online.
>
I see, I have also looked into the files of the dependencies folder, where
to
Am 13.02.2020 um 18:03 schrieb Pavel Sanda :
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 08:45:06PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> I replace a thing I do not really understand with another thing that I do
>> not really understand either. Can someone tell me whether the use o lambda
>> expression is OK? I d
Hi all,
because of a change in behavior of Qt on Mac we have to make the
buffer lookup for a given temporary file more robust.
The root cause of this is the fact that on Mac temporary files
are reachable by more then one file name because of directory
/var being a symbolic link to /private/var. S
16 matches
Mail list logo
