Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-22 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien jeanpierre.chret...@free.fr wrote: Le 20/01/2013 19:12, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : The exported file type is shown where you suggest, but I think the Short Name is what LyX understands and needs. You can test this out. If you want to export

Re: Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-22 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Kornel Benko kor...@lyx.org wrote: Am Montag, 21. Januar 2013 um 09:07:57, schrieb Jean-Pierre Chrétien jeanpierre.chret...@free.fr Le 20/01/2013 19:12, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : The exported file type is shown where you suggest, but I think the Short

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-22 Thread Jean-Pierre Chrétien
Le 22/01/2013 09:30, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien to see which parameter (which differs from the format name\n Sounds good to me. I also like your replacement of to get an idea with to see and parameters with

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-22 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien jeanpierre.chret...@free.fr wrote: Le 22/01/2013 09:30, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien to see which parameter (which differs from the format name\n Sounds good to

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-22 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote: > Le 20/01/2013 19:12, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > >> The exported file type is shown where you suggest, but I think the >> Short Name is what LyX understands and needs. You can test this out. >> If you want

Re: Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-22 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Kornel Benko wrote: > Am Montag, 21. Januar 2013 um 09:07:57, schrieb Jean-Pierre Chrétien > > >> Le 20/01/2013 19:12, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > >> > >> > The exported file type is shown where you suggest, but I

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-22 Thread Jean-Pierre Chrétien
Le 22/01/2013 09:30, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien to see which parameter (which differs from the format name\n Sounds good to me. I also like your replacement of "to get an idea" with "to see" and "parameters" with

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-22 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote: > Le 22/01/2013 09:30, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien > > > >>>to see which parameter (which differs from the format >>> name\n > >

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-21 Thread Jean-Pierre Chrétien
Le 20/01/2013 19:12, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : The exported file type is shown where you suggest, but I think the Short Name is what LyX understands and needs. You can test this out. If you want to export to PDF (pdflatex), the following does not work: $ lyx -e PDF (pdflatex) example.lyx The

Re: Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-21 Thread Kornel Benko
Am Montag, 21. Januar 2013 um 09:07:57, schrieb Jean-Pierre Chrétien jeanpierre.chret...@free.fr Le 20/01/2013 19:12, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : The exported file type is shown where you suggest, but I think the Short Name is what LyX understands and needs. You can test this out. If you

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-21 Thread Jean-Pierre Chrétien
Le 20/01/2013 19:12, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : The exported file type is shown where you suggest, but I think the Short Name is what LyX understands and needs. You can test this out. If you want to export to PDF (pdflatex), the following does not work: $ lyx -e "PDF (pdflatex)" example.lyx The

Re: Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-21 Thread Kornel Benko
Am Montag, 21. Januar 2013 um 09:07:57, schrieb Jean-Pierre Chrétien > Le 20/01/2013 19:12, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > > The exported file type is shown where you suggest, but I think the > > Short Name is what LyX understands and needs. You can test this out. >

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-20 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien jeanpierre.chret...@free.fr wrote: Hello again, While updating fr.po for trunk, I found changes in the message implementing lyx --help, and I think I found a typo (not in the new stuff, however). I think that pointing to

Re: LyX.cpp

2013-01-20 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote: > > Hello again, > > While updating fr.po for trunk, I found changes in the message implementing > lyx --help, and I think I found a typo (not in the new stuff, however). > > I think that pointing to > >

Re: LyX.cpp compile error

2008-10-09 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Joost Verburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The current trunk does not compile. parse_geometry is LyX.cpp (line 1057) does not return a value. Does it work now? I wonder why my compiler did not complain. JMarc

Re: LyX.cpp compile error

2008-10-09 Thread Abdelrazak Younes
On 09/10/2008 16:48, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Joost Verburg[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The current trunk does not compile. parse_geometry is LyX.cpp (line 1057) does not return a value. Does it work now? I wonder why my compiler did not complain. Hum, it seems that we fixed

Re: LyX.cpp compile error

2008-10-09 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Abdelrazak Younes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hum, it seems that we fixed that at the same time (I simply ignored the conflict and didn't understand why there was only my change in there). Anyway, I think your fix was wrong, wasn't it? You are completely right indeed. Thanks. JMarc

Re: LyX.cpp compile error

2008-10-09 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Joost Verburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The current trunk does not compile. parse_geometry is LyX.cpp (line > 1057) does not return a value. Does it work now? I wonder why my compiler did not complain. JMarc

Re: LyX.cpp compile error

2008-10-09 Thread Abdelrazak Younes
On 09/10/2008 16:48, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Joost Verburg<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: The current trunk does not compile. parse_geometry is LyX.cpp (line 1057) does not return a value. Does it work now? I wonder why my compiler did not complain. Hum, it seems that we

Re: LyX.cpp compile error

2008-10-09 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hum, it seems that we fixed that at the same time (I simply ignored > the conflict and didn't understand why there was only my change in > there). Anyway, I think your fix was wrong, wasn't it? You are completely right indeed. Thanks. JMarc