On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 04:46:20PM +0100, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 14/09/2016 à 01:39, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >
> >Oh, yes. Apparently, macros are not the only thing that may be not
> >up to date. Hopefully, I nailed this at 8ec91e80. Please, try again.
> >
>
>
> Unfortunately, the
Am Mittwoch, 14. September 2016 um 16:36:38, schrieb Scott Kostyshak
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:26:47PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 14. September 2016 um 15:44:31, schrieb Scott Kostyshak
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 07:25:43PM +,
Le 13/09/2016 à 18:26, Guillaume Munch a écrit :
In fact I was doing something special, opening it with a non-existent
(hence "modified") file.
Try launching with the command
"lyx filethatdoesnotexistonjmarcscomputer.lyx".
I do not do that very often so I do not guarantee that it is a
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:26:47PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 14. September 2016 um 15:44:31, schrieb Scott Kostyshak
>
> > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 07:25:43PM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
> > > > Full list of failing tests is attached. The tests were run on a
Am Mittwoch, 14. September 2016 um 19:25:43, schrieb Guenter Milde
> Dear Scott,
>
> On 2016-09-14, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>
> > I attach my complete list of failing tests (for git hash f2a263e3). The
> > ones that are interesting I think are listed below with some
Am Mittwoch, 14. September 2016 um 15:44:31, schrieb Scott Kostyshak
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 07:25:43PM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
>
> > > 280:export/export/Unicode-characters/077-79-mathops-technical-control-utf8_pdf2
> >
> > > Is this something new that you committed
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 07:25:43PM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
> > 280:export/export/Unicode-characters/077-79-mathops-technical-control-utf8_pdf2
>
> > Is this something new that you committed recently? Does the test pass
> > for you?
>
> There are new test samples for lib/unicodesymbols.
>
Dear Scott,
On 2016-09-14, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> I attach my complete list of failing tests (for git hash f2a263e3). The
> ones that are interesting I think are listed below with some comments:
...
> 280:export/export/Unicode-characters/077-79-mathops-technical-control-utf8_pdf2
> Is this
Le 14/09/2016 à 01:39, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
Oh, yes. Apparently, macros are not the only thing that may be not
up to date. Hopefully, I nailed this at 8ec91e80. Please, try again.
Unfortunately, the attached file which used to compile successfully no
longer does.
LyX used to export
On 09/12/2016 01:21 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
On 09/11/2016 09:32 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Paul A. Rubin wrote:
I can perhaps step in and do some interim
maintenance (once I get the keys to the castle).
Can you be more specific what changes you have in mind?
One: Apparently,
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:54:06PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 08:36:57PM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
> > Which tests still fail?
>
> I run the tests on current master and post back tomorrow.
I attach my complete list of failing tests (for git hash f2a263e3). The
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 08:25:31AM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
> On 2016-09-14, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>
> >> A big step towards "easy to maintain" will be storing of LaTeX-log
> >> output in the test log. Currently, we always have to "hand-compile"
> >> (and in many cases edit the sources
Le 14/09/2016 à 01:39, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
Oh, yes. Apparently, macros are not the only thing that may be not
up to date. Hopefully, I nailed this at 8ec91e80. Please, try again.
Thanks, I no longer have crashes on opening.
On 2016-09-14, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> A big step towards "easy to maintain" will be storing of LaTeX-log
>> output in the test log. Currently, we always have to "hand-compile"
>> (and in many cases edit the sources before) to find out what went
>> wrong.
> Yes that would be nice. I think we
14 matches
Mail list logo