Andre == Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andre On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
Andre wrote:
So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate the
attached patch into 1.3.1cvs.
It works with 1.4.0cvs at least
Andre Should be the same.
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
Andre> wrote:
>> > So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate the
>> attached > patch into 1.3.1cvs.
>>
>> It works with 1.4.0cvs at least
Andre>
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 01:59:29AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
this is a weird math bug I've found, it produces this error message in
lyx:
Double superscript.
J^{l}^
{T}\end{array}\]
I treat `x^1^2' essentially like `x^1{}^2'
To explain you really have to look at
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 01:59:29AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
this is a weird math bug I've found, it produces this error message in
lyx:
Double superscript.
J^{l}^
{T}\end{array}\]
I treat `x^1^2' essentially like
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:25:38AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
PS. I caught this problem while working on my thesis... which ought to
explain why I'm not using the CVS version :-) DS
Oh. I am using 1.4.0cvs for my thesis.
Maybe this explains something, too...
*sigh*
Andre'
--
Those
Christian == Christian Ridderström [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Christian On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 01:59:29AM +0100, Christian Ridderström
wrote: this is a weird math bug I've found, it produces this
error message in lyx: Double superscript.
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:25:38AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
PS. I caught this problem while working on my thesis... which ought to
explain why I'm not using the CVS version :-) DS
Oh. I am using 1.4.0cvs for my thesis.
Maybe this
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:32:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Christian Oops, should have said that this was with 1.3.0 qt and
Christian 1.3.0 xforms. I'll try and compile the cvs-version and see
Christian how that works.
Andre', does this means this bug exists in 1.3.0? Is it easily
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:34:53AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
i.e. When I want to update cvs and compile it again, is it enough to do
the following:
cd /space/lyx-devel; # This is where I keep the source-code
cvs up
cd ../lyx-qt; # This is where I
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:32:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Andre', does this means this bug exists in 1.3.0? Is it easily
fixable?
I am currently compiling a 1.3.0 release.
I'll check.
Have you ever heard of something called
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:50:20AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
Have you ever heard of something called 'modules'?
http://modules.sourceforge.net/
No.
How is that better than having two cvs snapshots?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:32:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Christian Oops, should have said that this was with 1.3.0 qt and
Christian 1.3.0 xforms. I'll try and compile the cvs-version and see
Christian how that works.
Andre', does this means this bug exists in 1.3.0? Is it easily
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:50:20AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
Have you ever heard of something called 'modules'?
http://modules.sourceforge.net/
No.
Basically it's a systematic way of configuring your system for using
different
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:32:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Christian Oops, should have said that this was with 1.3.0 qt and
Christian 1.3.0 xforms. I'll try and compile the cvs-version and see
Christian how that works.
Andre', does
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:27:10PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
I like it because once you've installed a version of the software
properly, you can usually very easy go back and use that version
even if you've installed a later version. I've got these lyx modules:
module avail lyx
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
I beg to differ... it's a dangerous bug. First of all, it doesn't
compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
This is what the difference looks like:
So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
I beg to differ... it's a dangerous bug. First of all, it doesn't
compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
This is what the difference looks like:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderstr?m wrote:
I beg to differ... it's a dangerous bug. First of all, it doesn't
compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
This is what the difference looks like:
ludde:bugsdiff math1.lyx math1_saved.lyx
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:27:10PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
I like it because once you've installed a version of the software
properly, you can usually very easy go back and use that version
even if you've installed a later version.
Christian Ridderström wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
wrote:
I beg to differ... it's a dangerous bug. First of all, it
doesn't compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a
different output. This is
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Dekel Tsur wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderstr?m wrote:
BTW, do you really need {J^l}^T and not J^{l^T} or (J^l)^T ?
J^{l^T} doesn't look very nice... here J^l is a matrix, and then I want to
put a 'transpose' on it. But
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
I beg to differ... it's a dangerous bug. First of all, it doesn't
compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
Hmm... it still doesn't compile.. are
Christian Ridderström wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
wrote:
I beg to differ... it's a dangerous bug. First of all, it
doesn't compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a
different output.
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
I beg to differ... it's a dangerous bug. First of all, it doesn't
compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
This is what the difference looks like:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate the attached
patch into 1.3.1cvs.
It works with 1.4.0cvs at least
Should be the same.
Jean-Marc? Your entrance!
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate the attached
patch into 1.3.1cvs.
It works with 1.4.0cvs at least
Should be the same.
Jean-Marc? Your
Christian Ridderström wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
wrote:
So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate
the attached patch into 1.3.1cvs.
It works with 1.4.0cvs at least
Should
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Angus Leeming wrote:
Christian Ridderström wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
wrote:
So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate
the attached patch into
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 01:59:29AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> this is a weird math bug I've found, it produces this error message in
> lyx:
> Double superscript.
>
> J^{l}^
>
>{T}\end{array}\]
>
> I treat `x^1^2' essentially like `x^1{}^2'
>
> To explain you really have
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 01:59:29AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > this is a weird math bug I've found, it produces this error message in
> > lyx:
> > Double superscript.
> >
> > J^{l}^
> >
> >{T}\end{array}\]
> >
> > I treat
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:25:38AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> PS. I caught this problem while working on my thesis... which ought to
> explain why I'm not using the CVS version :-) DS
Oh. I am using 1.4.0cvs for my thesis.
Maybe this explains something, too...
*sigh*
Andre'
--
> "Christian" == Christian Ridderström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Christian> On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 01:59:29AM +0100, Christian Ridderström
>> wrote: > this is a weird math bug I've found, it produces this
>> error message in > lyx: > Double
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:25:38AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > PS. I caught this problem while working on my thesis... which ought to
> > explain why I'm not using the CVS version :-) DS
>
> Oh. I am using 1.4.0cvs for my thesis.
> Maybe
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:32:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Christian> Oops, should have said that this was with 1.3.0 qt and
> Christian> 1.3.0 xforms. I'll try and compile the cvs-version and see
> Christian> how that works.
>
> Andre', does this means this bug exists in 1.3.0? Is
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:34:53AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> i.e. When I want to update cvs and compile it again, is it enough to do
> the following:
>
> cd /space/lyx-devel; # This is where I keep the source-code
> cvs up
> cd ../lyx-qt; # This is where
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:32:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Andre', does this means this bug exists in 1.3.0? Is it easily
> > fixable?
>
> I am currently compiling a 1.3.0 release.
> I'll check.
>
Have you ever heard of something called
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:50:20AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> Have you ever heard of something called 'modules'?
>
> http://modules.sourceforge.net/
No.
How is that better than having two cvs snapshots?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:32:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Christian> Oops, should have said that this was with 1.3.0 qt and
> Christian> 1.3.0 xforms. I'll try and compile the cvs-version and see
> Christian> how that works.
>
> Andre', does this means this bug exists in 1.3.0? Is
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:50:20AM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > Have you ever heard of something called 'modules'?
> >
> > http://modules.sourceforge.net/
>
> No.
>
Basically it's a systematic way of configuring your system for using
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 11:32:44AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Christian> Oops, should have said that this was with 1.3.0 qt and
> > Christian> 1.3.0 xforms. I'll try and compile the cvs-version and see
> > Christian> how that works.
> >
> >
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:27:10PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> I like it because once you've installed a version of the software
> properly, you can usually very easy go back and use that version
> even if you've installed a later version. I've got these lyx modules:
> >module avail
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> I beg to differ... it's a "dangerous bug". First of all, it doesn't
> compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
> This is what the difference looks like:
So test it and if you are happy tell
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > I beg to differ... it's a "dangerous bug". First of all, it doesn't
> > compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
> > This is what the difference
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderstr?m wrote:
> I beg to differ... it's a "dangerous bug". First of all, it doesn't
> compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
> This is what the difference looks like:
>
> ludde:bugs>diff math1.lyx
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:27:10PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > I like it because once you've installed a version of the software
> > properly, you can usually very easy go back and use that version
> > even if you've installed a later
Christian Ridderström wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
>> wrote:
>> > I beg to differ... it's a "dangerous bug". First of all, it
>> > doesn't compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a
>> > different
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderstr?m wrote:
>
> BTW, do you really need {J^l}^T and not J^{l^T} or (J^l)^T ?
J^{l^T} doesn't look very nice... here J^l is a matrix, and then I want to
put a 'transpose' on it. But
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > I beg to differ... it's a "dangerous bug". First of all, it doesn't
> > compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
Hmm... it still doesn't compile..
Christian Ridderström wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
>> wrote:
>> > I beg to differ... it's a "dangerous bug". First of all, it
>> > doesn't compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a
>> > different
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:31:19PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > I beg to differ... it's a "dangerous bug". First of all, it doesn't
> > compile the dvi, and secondly, saving it produces a different output.
> > This is what the difference
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate the attached
> > patch into 1.3.1cvs.
>
> It works with 1.4.0cvs at least
Should be the same.
Jean-Marc? Your entrance!
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > > So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate the attached
> > > patch into 1.3.1cvs.
> >
> > It works with 1.4.0cvs at least
>
> Should be the same.
>
>
Christian Ridderström wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
>> wrote:
>> > > So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate
>> > > the attached patch into 1.3.1cvs.
>> >
>> > It works with 1.4.0cvs
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Christian Ridderström wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Christian Ridderström
> >> wrote:
> >> > > So test it and if you are happy tell Jean-Marc to incorporate
> >> > > the
this is a weird math bug I've found, it produces this error message in
lyx:
Double superscript.
J^{l}^
{T}\end{array}\]
I treat `x^1^2' essentially like `x^1{}^2'
To explain you really have to look at the example file:
http://www.md.kth.se/~chr/lyx/bugs/math1.lyx
or see the
this is a weird math bug I've found, it produces this error message in
lyx:
Double superscript.
J^{l}^
{T}\end{array}\]
I treat `x^1^2' essentially like `x^1{}^2'
To explain you really have to look at the example file:
http://www.md.kth.se/~chr/lyx/bugs/math1.lyx
or see the
56 matches
Mail list logo
