Le 23/10/2017 à 08:28, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 09:01:02PM +, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
That way I can run the ctests just to double-check.
Thanks for sending me the patch. I checked and there are no changes in
ctests (with respect to 71a35ea) so I think we are good
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 09:01:02PM +, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> That way I can run the ctests just to double-check.
Thanks for sending me the patch. I checked and there are no changes in
ctests (with respect to 71a35ea) so I think we are good to go.
Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 01:07:29PM +, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote:
> Le 07/05/2017 à 21:58, Jean-Pierre Chrétien a écrit :
>
> >
> > What do you think? Should I parse the files to find \usepackage{xxx}
> > command in preambles, where xxx is one of the ten math packages managed
> > by math
Le 07/05/2017 à 21:58, Jean-Pierre Chrétien a écrit :
What do you think? Should I parse the files to find \usepackage{xxx} command in
preambles, where xxx is one of the ten math packages managed by math options
I did not find any occurrence.
or is it sufficient to have no ctest failure?
Dear developers
I finally ended with no errors with the ctest of the 335 files in doc, examples
and templates directories containing one or more of the ten math options set to
"Do not load".
Then I ran the following filter on the files
s/use_package amsmath 0/use_package amsmath 1/;
