Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup mathes/BUGS (#3493)

Am Dienstag, dem 22.11.2022 um 10:24 +0100 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes: > I guess the issue is the difference in behavior of fonts changes in > mathed (where they nest) and texted (where they toggle). > > I would guess we have an enhancement/bug ticket about that somewhere. Didn't find one.

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup mathes/BUGS (#3493)

Le 22/11/2022 à 09:15, Juergen Spitzmueller a écrit : commit 26f6aa465ecb74de323b4756ed043a6d91b883dd Author: Juergen Spitzmueller Date: Tue Nov 22 10:09:16 2022 +0100 Cleanup mathes/BUGS (#3493) Removing. M-c e has a different meaning nowadays (tabular-feature delete

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros4] Quash error message when we are loading.

gt;> Am Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:01:38 -0500 > >>> schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > >>> > >>>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:55:05PM +0100, Kornel Benko wrote: > >>>>> Am Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:37:27 +0100 (CET) > >>>

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros4] Quash error message when we are loading.

: Am Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:37:27 +0100 (CET) schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck : The branch, cleanup/updateMacros4, has been updated. How can I access this repo? Not seen in 'git branch -a'. Kornel Does "git fetch features" fetch the branches for you? It seems to w

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros4] Quash error message when we are loading.

rote: > > > > Am Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:37:27 +0100 (CET) > > > > schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck : > > > > > > > > > The branch, cleanup/updateMacros4, has been updated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > H

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros4] Quash error message when we are loading.

gt; schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck : > > > > > > > The branch, cleanup/updateMacros4, has been updated. > > > > > > > > > > How can I access this repo? Not seen in 'git branch -a'. > > > > > > Kornel > > > > Does "git

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros4] Quash error message when we are loading.

Am Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:01:38 -0500 schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:55:05PM +0100, Kornel Benko wrote: > > Am Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:37:27 +0100 (CET) > > schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck : > > > > > The branch, cleanup/updateMacros4, has been upda

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros4] Quash error message when we are loading.

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:55:05PM +0100, Kornel Benko wrote: > Am Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:37:27 +0100 (CET) > schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck : > > > The branch, cleanup/updateMacros4, has been updated. > > > > How can I access this repo? Not seen in 'git branch -a'. &

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros4] Quash error message when we are loading.

Am Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:37:27 +0100 (CET) schrieb Richard Kimberly Heck : > The branch, cleanup/updateMacros4, has been updated. > How can I access this repo? Not seen in 'git branch -a'. Kornel pgpLEmNq0IXpk.pgp Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP -- lyx-devel mailin

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros] Some comments and some minor re-organization

Le 10 novembre 2020 00:45:04 GMT+01:00, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit : >Thanks for the reminder. At the moment, I'm just trying to understand >how this thing works and cleaning up some stuff that seems...hard to >understand. This code is terrifying indeed. I am glad you are doing something

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros] Some comments and some minor re-organization

On 11/9/20 4:22 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 09/11/2020 à 21:26, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit : commit 4a6d50251a59f6f817ecbbbdb0d3295ee6a3bf5b Author: Richard Kimberly Heck Date:   Mon Nov 9 15:56:01 2020 -0500 Some comments and some minor re-organization +    // FIXME This is

Re: [LyX features/cleanup/updateMacros] Some comments and some minor re-organization

Le 09/11/2020 à 21:26, Richard Kimberly Heck a écrit : commit 4a6d50251a59f6f817ecbbbdb0d3295ee6a3bf5b Author: Richard Kimberly Heck Date: Mon Nov 9 15:56:01 2020 -0500 Some comments and some minor re-organization + // FIXME This is probably a large part of why updateMacros is +

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

Am 31.08.2020 um 17:45 schrieb Stephan Witt : > > Am 31.08.2020 um 17:25 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes : >> >> Le 30/08/2020 à 22:29, Stephan Witt a écrit : >>> Am 30.08.2020 um 16:56 schrieb Pavel Sanda : On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 03:58:34PM +0200, Stephan Witt wrote: > 1. Tab Bar

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

Le 31/08/2020 à 17:45, Stephan Witt a écrit : The patch looks good. What happens on older versions of macOS. Do they all implement that? It was a shot in the dark. It works surprisingly well on Catalina and Mojave. I’ll check it for 10.11.6 (El Capitan) next. In principle it should be

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

Am 31.08.2020 um 17:25 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes : > > Le 30/08/2020 à 22:29, Stephan Witt a écrit : >> Am 30.08.2020 um 16:56 schrieb Pavel Sanda : >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 03:58:34PM +0200, Stephan Witt wrote: 1. Tab Bar related - I don???t know how. Probably not w/o Qt-support

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

Le 30/08/2020 à 22:29, Stephan Witt a écrit : Am 30.08.2020 um 16:56 schrieb Pavel Sanda : On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 03:58:34PM +0200, Stephan Witt wrote: 1. Tab Bar related - I don???t know how. Probably not w/o Qt-support for it. showBar like in GuiWorkArea.cpp:1714 does not work? It could

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

Le 30/08/2020 à 15:58, Stephan Witt a écrit : Am 30.08.2020 um 15:48 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes : Le 30/08/2020 à 15:20, Stephan Witt a écrit : commit 292799a4bd3fead1d631678a94a4eccc89193201 Author: Stephan Witt Date: Sun Aug 30 15:34:44 2020 +0200 #11756 cleanup the view menu

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 03:58:34PM +0200, Stephan Witt wrote: > 1. Tab Bar related - I don???t know how. Probably not w/o Qt-support for it. showBar like in GuiWorkArea.cpp:1714 does not work? It could be easily added as a part of ui-toggle lfun. Pavel -- lyx-devel mailing list

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

Sun Aug 30 15:34:44 2020 +0200 >>>#11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac >>> Using US english desktop language LyX's Mac OS adds some items to >>> the view menu: >>>1. Show/Hide Tab Bar and >>>2. Enter Full Screen >>>These

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

Am 30.08.2020 um 15:48 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes : > > Le 30/08/2020 à 15:20, Stephan Witt a écrit : >> commit 292799a4bd3fead1d631678a94a4eccc89193201 >> Author: Stephan Witt >> Date: Sun Aug 30 15:34:44 2020 +0200 >> #11756 cleanup the view menu on Ma

Re: [LyX/master] #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac

Le 30/08/2020 à 15:20, Stephan Witt a écrit : commit 292799a4bd3fead1d631678a94a4eccc89193201 Author: Stephan Witt Date: Sun Aug 30 15:34:44 2020 +0200 #11756 cleanup the view menu on Mac Using US english desktop language LyX's Mac OS adds some items to the view menu: 1

Re: Remove monolithic build ? (was: Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code)

Am Dienstag, 16. Januar 2018 um 16:28:37, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > Le 11/01/2018 à 15:25, Pavel Sanda a écrit : > > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >> Le 09/01/2018 ? 20:33, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > >>> Note that the monolithic builds took longer than the > >>>

Remove monolithic build ? (was: Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code)

Le 11/01/2018 à 15:25, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 09/01/2018 ? 20:33, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : Note that the monolithic builds took longer than the non-monolithic builds (at least in "real" and "user" time. I don't know why "sys" time is actually shorter).

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 09/01/2018 ? 20:33, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : >> Note that the monolithic builds took longer than the >> non-monolithic builds (at least in "real" and "user" time. I don't know >> why "sys" time is actually shorter). > > Interesting. Does anyone around rely on

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Am Mittwoch, 10. Januar 2018 um 22:06:09, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > Le 09/01/2018 à 20:33, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > Note that the monolithic builds took longer than the > > non-monolithic builds (at least in "real" and "user" time. I don't know > > why "sys" time is

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Le 09/01/2018 à 20:33, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : Note that the monolithic builds took longer than the non-monolithic builds (at least in "real" and "user" time. I don't know why "sys" time is actually shorter). Interesting. Does anyone around rely on monolithic builds? JMarc

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 09:01:07AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Nice. How long did it require to do its magic? I don't know. I ran it before I went to sleep. If I remember correctly, I think it might have involved around something 8 full non-mono compilations and 4 full mono compilations

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Le 07/01/2018 à 06:19, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 09:34:52PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 6 janvier 2018 22:17:11 GMT+01:00, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : Better now? Yes, thanks for the quick fix. Your bisect did all the work. Well,

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 09:34:52PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 6 janvier 2018 22:17:11 GMT+01:00, Scott Kostyshak a > écrit : > >> Better now? > > > >Yes, thanks for the quick fix. > > > Your bisect did all the work. Well, really a bisect script did all the work.

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Le 6 janvier 2018 22:17:11 GMT+01:00, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : >> Better now? > >Yes, thanks for the quick fix. Your bisect did all the work. JMarc

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 07:47:33PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 06/01/2018 à 20:02, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > I think that this commit broke the monolithic build. > > Better now? Yes, thanks for the quick fix. Scott signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Le 06/01/2018 à 20:02, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : I think that this commit broke the monolithic build. Better now? JMarc

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 03:20:29PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > commit 1a7e342652fd0aaff44793675b86807a0f511abd > Author: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <lasgout...@lyx.org> > Date: Sat Jul 22 01:19:45 2017 +0200 > > Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code > >

Re: [LyX features/properpaint] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Le 25/07/2017 à 11:33, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Not sure how much strict you wanted to be about cursor/caret but there were bunch of "cursors" left in the patch... P Good catch. I fixed that in the properpaint branch now and also fixed some warnings that I missed because I built in profiling

Re: [LyX features/properpaint] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Le 25/07/2017 à 11:33, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Not sure how much strict you wanted to be about cursor/caret but there were bunch of "cursors" left in the patch... P Indeed :) I'll double check that. JMarc

Re: [LyX features/properpaint] Cleanup and simplify WorkArea code

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > @@ -486,9 +469,9 @@ void GuiWorkArea::redraw(bool update_metrics) > > // update cursor position, because otherwise it has to wait until > // the blinking interval is over > - if (d->cursor_visible_) { > - d->hideCursor(); > -

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

y other criterion is >> that I don't want to personally spend any time on this. We have other >> issues and debates going on where I want to spend my time. So the hard >> part is convincing other LyX devs. I support a cleanup before 2.3.0. > I'm willing to take care of it

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:10:31AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > I just went through a large chunk of the minted postings and I still don't > have a clear idea about my preference, and I'm therefore not sure what to > write that'd contribute. > > I'm generally inclined towards security

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:48:34AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > ATM, in no way you can risk > something if you decide to use minted. You would have to know what to > change in the preferences for taking that risk. On the contrary, when > using one of the above mentioned features, the risk is

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

of configuring this, I would recommend it. So I am in favour of some automated code cleanup but only of the lightweight kind. It should not touch indentation nor overlong lines which is sometimes done by hand. There could be two levels of configuration: a lightweight configuration that is applied

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On 17 July 2017 at 00:48, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > Dear Christian, > > I see that the operated obfuscation of issues is working with you. > Dear Enrico, Don't worry, all is not lost and any operation obfuscation has not yet succeeded in invading Sweden. I still know that I

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:10:31AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > On 16 July 2017 at 22:45, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > What I mean is that my absolute priority these days is to have 2.3.0 out. > > > Fully understood. > > > > The cleanups I proposed where

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On 16 July 2017 at 22:45, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > What I mean is that my absolute priority these days is to have 2.3.0 out. Fully understood. > The cleanups I proposed where chosen to have a minimal effect on release > date. Anything that requires too much thinking

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Le 16/07/2017 à 22:02, Christian Ridderström a écrit : Indeed, my original message was about doing things that had a moderate price tag attached to them. Imposing a style is IMO too expensive for us at this point. I'm definitely not looking to impose a new style and I'm spending

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On 16 July 2017 at 21:39, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 16/07/2017 à 21:34, Kornel Benko a écrit : > >> If not now, then probably never. There is no optimal start, except >> at start of a project. >> > > Not necessarily. We do not have much spare time to do it right, and

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On 16 July 2017 at 21:15, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 16/07/2017 à 20:51, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > >> "no debate" is good, but we want even more than that. We want a few more >> "yes let's go for it!" before we impose a new style. I think we got >> support from

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Le 16/07/2017 à 21:34, Kornel Benko a écrit : If not now, then probably never. There is no optimal start, except at start of a project. Not necessarily. We do not have much spare time to do it right, and this kind of thing needs to be correct on first run. We can discuss this in the 2.4

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Am Sonntag, 16. Juli 2017 um 21:15:42, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > Le 16/07/2017 à 20:51, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > "no debate" is good, but we want even more than that. We want a few more > > "yes let's go for it!" before we impose a new style. I think we got > >

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Le 16/07/2017 à 20:51, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : "no debate" is good, but we want even more than that. We want a few more "yes let's go for it!" before we impose a new style. I think we got support from Kornel, but we would want more to go forward. There are other costs to changing many lines

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 07:53:29PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 15/07/2017 à 19:28, Christian Ridderström a écrit : > > I hope we can at least see if a debate is necessary, we might get lucky. > > Perhaps the current source code is mainly consistent, in which case we > > could align to

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Le 15/07/2017 à 19:28, Christian Ridderström a écrit : I hope we can at least see if a debate is necessary, we might get lucky. Perhaps the current source code is mainly consistent, in which case we could align to that format. I can at least compile a list of topics. Sure. What I do not want

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On 15 July 2017 at 19:06, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 15/07/2017 à 18:55, Christian Ridderström a écrit : > >> In my opinion, if we don't reach consensus easily on formatting issues, >> we should at least for now refrain from using a .clang-format. >> > > This is

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Le 15/07/2017 à 18:55, Christian Ridderström a écrit : In my opinion, if we don't reach consensus easily on formatting issues, we should at least for now refrain from using a .clang-format. This is probably what is going to take too much time... I am not sure that we should have such a

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On 7 July 2017 at 04:37, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > What do others think? > > ^ If you get support from other LyX devs, and you are willing to take > care of everything, then I'm find with it. My only other criterion is > that I don't want to personally spend any time on this.

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Am Freitag, 7. Juli 2017 um 00:03:50, schrieb Christian Ridderström > > PS. > As I see it, after we're using clang-format, a next step could be to use > 'clang-tidy' to do some static analysis. > clang-format-custom I have version clang-format-3.9. Using this version, there are

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Am Donnerstag, 6. Juli 2017 um 22:37:59, schrieb Scott Kostyshak > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:03:50AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > > > - We can compare the built executable before and after running clang-format, > > the executables should be identical. > > I don't

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:03:50AM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > - We can compare the built executable before and after running clang-format, > the executables should be identical. I don't know why I had never considered that approach before (although it is obvious now), and I like

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Hi Scott, On 6 July 2017 at 22:20, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > - Now (before release) would be a good time to start using clang-format > > Why? One reason is that it might make it easier to backport fixes from > master to 2.3.x. This was my reason, as comparison of code

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 08:23:24PM +0200, Christian Ridderström wrote: > - Now (before release) would be a good time to start using clang-format Why? One reason is that it might make it easier to backport fixes from master to 2.3.x. A reason against such a change is that the benefit is more

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

ase backporting of > patches to stable. > I posted what's below in a different thread, but it's better of here: - If we're open to doing to some cleanup of the code I strongly suggest we use a tool called 'clang-format' to automatically take care of code formatting. I've introduced this too

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Le 03/07/2017 à 11:26, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : * renaming MathMacro (resp. MathMacroTemplate) to InsetMathMacro (resp. InsetMathMacroTemplate). These are insets, and therefore they should be named as insets. It helps understanding mathed sources IMO (I have been looking a lot at these

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Le 03/07/17 à 20:48, Richard Heck a écrit : I left the *.ui files, since these are (typically) auto-generated, and Qt Designer will do as it pleases. Good point :) JMarc

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On 07/03/2017 02:09 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 03/07/17 à 19:58, Richard Heck a écrit : >> These are the files that still have trailing whitespace: > > Makefile.am, *.m files and tex2lyx/tex2lyx.1in can be trimmed. *ui > file probably too. I left the *.ui files, since these are

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Le 03/07/17 à 19:58, Richard Heck a écrit : These are the files that still have trailing whitespace: Thanks for doiing it, Richard. Makefile.am, *.m files and tex2lyx/tex2lyx.1in can be trimmed. *ui file probably too. I think that *.lyx files should not be touched, since spaces can be at

Re: Cleanup before 2.3.0?

On 07/03/2017 05:26 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > Hi there, > > Since we are approaching major release, I think it is a good time to > do some mechanical clean-ups. The idea is that it is better to do it > now instead of at the beginning of a cycle in order to ease > backporting of patches

Cleanup before 2.3.0?

Hi there, Since we are approaching major release, I think it is a good time to do some mechanical clean-ups. The idea is that it is better to do it now instead of at the beginning of a cycle in order to ease backporting of patches to stable. I have two things in mind: * renaming MathMacro

Re: [LyX/master] Fix missing include for file i/o prototypes after header cleanup in change 489dca71cd99bbc78780fa40311a2eb042c0320e

Le 04/07/2016 10:30, Stephan Witt a écrit : commit df73cade2bdbf272f5228ec895d97c21a20242d5 Author: Stephan Witt <sw...@lyx.org> Date: Mon Jul 4 10:30:19 2016 +0200 Fix missing include for file i/o prototypes after header cleanup in change 489dca71cd99bbc78780fa40311a2eb042

Re: [LyX/2.3-staging] Cleanup handling of LFUN_LAYOUT_PARAGRAPH in getStatus

Le 20/05/2016 à 11:25, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : commit cfb41a57c28389e939d663044525694ec90005a5 Author: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <lasgout...@lyx.org> Date: Thu May 12 17:31:47 2016 +0200 Cleanup handling of LFUN_LAYOUT_PARAGRAPH in getStatus The way it works is: * the

Re: [LyX features/betterpaint] Cleanup Painter text() API

Le 22/03/2016 14:17, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : The branch, betterpaint, has been created. at 62ac77bfa885c25af226659351da03722f15922f (commit) I created two new branches in the features repository. * features/trivial: contains a set of small cleanup that had be accumulating

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 07:24:28PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 24/01/2015 00:41, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : I just discovered that now also the --with-extra-prefix option is broken. The inc and lib dirs are now assigned to AM_CPPFLAGS rather than CPPFLAGS and configure fails to find

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 07:24:28PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Grmpf. So I have to modify the normal variables after all. But how are users supposed to override CPPFLAGS at make time? Do you know whether there is a set of rules to separate AM_xxx from plain xxx? There is nothing to

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 24/01/2015 00:41, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 03:10:44PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 13/01/2015 14:59, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 13/01/2015 14:43, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : C++ Compiler user flags: -g -O2 So you have explicitly set

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 27/01/15 20:08, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : I think the attached is the correct patch for the following two reasons. 1) Otherwise configure fails to find headers. 2) The only alternative would be directly using CPPFLAGS. Look, I have aspell installed in /c/MinGW and configure LyX using

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 24/01/2015 00:41, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 03:10:44PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 13/01/2015 14:59, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 13/01/2015 14:43, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : C++ Compiler user flags: -g -O2 So you have explicitly set

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 07:24:28PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 24/01/2015 00:41, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : > >I just discovered that now also the --with-extra-prefix option is broken. > >The inc and lib dirs are now assigned to AM_CPPFLAGS rather than CPPFLAGS > >and configure fails

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 07:24:28PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Grmpf. So I have to modify the normal variables after all. But how > are users supposed to override CPPFLAGS at make time? Do you know > whether there is a set of rules to separate AM_xxx from plain xxx? There is nothing to

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 27/01/15 20:08, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : I think the attached is the correct patch for the following two reasons. 1) Otherwise configure fails to find headers. 2) The only alternative would be directly using CPPFLAGS. Look, I have aspell installed in /c/MinGW and configure LyX using

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 03:10:44PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 13/01/2015 14:59, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 13/01/2015 14:43, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : C++ Compiler user flags: -g -O2 So you have explicitly set CXXFLAGS somewhere, or config.status remember the old

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 03:10:44PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 13/01/2015 14:59, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : > >Le 13/01/2015 14:43, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : > >> C++ Compiler user flags: -g -O2 > > > >So you have explicitly set CXXFLAGS somewhere, or config.status remember >

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 17:28, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : You don't like warnings? Recent compilers tend to be too much verbose and anyway give more warnings by default, without the need of encouraging them ;) Well, I can compile with latest clang without warning (except in Enchant++, that I cannot

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 14:43, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:18:31PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: commit ff42fea8ab70dc048bb28dc51120ae30309a3e81 Author: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes lasgout...@lyx.org Date: Tue Jan 13 11:48:07 2015 +0100 Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 14:59, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 13/01/2015 14:43, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : C++ Compiler user flags: -g -O2 So you have explicitly set CXXFLAGS somewhere, or config.status remember the old setting in its cache. Can you re-run ./configure with options? I have

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

: Tue Jan 13 11:48:07 2015 +0100 Cleanup autoconf compiler support Now I always get -g even if I use --disable-debug --enable-optimization=-O2 C++ Compiler user flags: -g -O2 So you have explicitly set CXXFLAGS somewhere, or config.status remember the old setting in its cache

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:18:31PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: commit ff42fea8ab70dc048bb28dc51120ae30309a3e81 Author: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes lasgout...@lyx.org Date: Tue Jan 13 11:48:07 2015 +0100 Cleanup autoconf compiler support Now I always get -g even if I use --disable

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 15:10, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : Hmm... I still get -g even after make distclean and rerunning configure. Is it better now? I made the choice of never touching CXXFLAGS, but only AM_CXXFLAGS. Tradionally, autoconf (tries to) set -g and -O in CXXFLAGS. Do you think this is a

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 04:02:52PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 13/01/2015 15:10, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : Hmm... I still get -g even after make distclean and rerunning configure. Is it better now? Yes, thanks. I made the choice of never touching CXXFLAGS, but only AM_CXXFLAGS.

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 17:09, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : I don't think so, provided that you have a way to override the default settings. In any case, the same set of configure options should not change the default settings, in general, and this is now almost the case. Almost, because previoulsy I was

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 05:11:38PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 13/01/2015 17:09, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : I don't think so, provided that you have a way to override the default settings. In any case, the same set of configure options should not change the default settings, in

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:18:31PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > commit ff42fea8ab70dc048bb28dc51120ae30309a3e81 > Author: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <lasgout...@lyx.org> > Date: Tue Jan 13 11:48:07 2015 +0100 > > Cleanup autoconf compiler support Now I always g

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 14:43, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:18:31PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: commit ff42fea8ab70dc048bb28dc51120ae30309a3e81 Author: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <lasgout...@lyx.org> Date: Tue Jan 13 11:48:07 2015 +0100 Cleanup autoconf compiler s

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

gouttes <lasgout...@lyx.org> > >>Date: Tue Jan 13 11:48:07 2015 +0100 > >> > >> Cleanup autoconf compiler support > > > >Now I always get "-g" even if I use "--disable-debug > >--enable-optimization=-O2" > > >

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 14:59, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 13/01/2015 14:43, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : C++ Compiler user flags: -g -O2 So you have explicitly set CXXFLAGS somewhere, or config.status remember the old setting in its cache. Can you re-run ./configure with options? I have

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 15:10, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : Hmm... I still get "-g" even after "make distclean" and rerunning configure. Is it better now? I made the choice of never touching CXXFLAGS, but only AM_CXXFLAGS. Tradionally, autoconf (tries to) set -g and -O in CXXFLAGS. Do you think this

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 04:02:52PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 13/01/2015 15:10, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : > >Hmm... I still get "-g" even after "make distclean" and rerunning configure. > > Is it better now? Yes, thanks. > I made the choice of never touching CXXFLAGS, but only

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 17:09, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : I don't think so, provided that you have a way to override the default settings. In any case, the same set of configure options should not change the default settings, in general, and this is now almost the case. Almost, because previoulsy I was

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 05:11:38PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 13/01/2015 17:09, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : > >I don't think so, provided that you have a way to override the default > >settings. In any case, the same set of configure options should not > >change the default settings,

Re: [LyX/master] Cleanup autoconf compiler support

Le 13/01/2015 17:28, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : You don't like warnings? Recent compilers tend to be too much verbose and anyway give more warnings by default, without the need of encouraging them ;) Well, I can compile with latest clang without warning (except in Enchant++, that I cannot

Re: [PATCH] Small post-kill-gettext cleanup

03/06/2013 18:22, Vincent van Ravesteijn: Op 3-6-2013 18:18, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes schreef: THe following patch moves a Qt workaround where it belongs, and solves a weird error message spotted by Vincent. Vincent, can this go in? JMarc Yes. Done. JMarc

Re: [PATCH] Small post-kill-gettext cleanup

03/06/2013 18:22, Vincent van Ravesteijn: Op 3-6-2013 18:18, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes schreef: THe following patch moves a Qt workaround where it belongs, and solves a weird error message spotted by Vincent. Vincent, can this go in? JMarc Yes. Done. JMarc

Re: [PATCH] Small post-kill-gettext cleanup

Op 3-6-2013 18:18, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes schreef: THe following patch moves a Qt workaround where it belongs, and solves a weird error message spotted by Vincent. Vincent, can this go in? JMarc Yes. Vincent

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >