Re: ctests: 4 failing "Unicode-characters" tests

On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 01:53:06PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > I still get an error for > export/export/latex/Unicode-characters/084-misc-symbols-utf8_pdf2 (Failed) > Does it pass for you? > > The error I get is: > ! Package inputenc Error: Unicode char ⚀ (U+2680) > (inputenc)

Re: #7964: LyX-Enhanced Chat

On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 01:31:30AM +0200, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote: > Hi all, > > FYI, I just rebased my old patch adding an interactive > XMPP chat within LyX (repo tommaso, branch features/chat5). > > T. Is there any documentation for it? Scott signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: #7964: LyX-Enhanced Chat

Hi all, FYI, I just rebased my old patch adding an interactive XMPP chat within LyX (repo tommaso, branch features/chat5). T. On 09/10/2016 00:58, LyX Ticket Tracker wrote: #7964: LyX-Enhanced Chat -+- Reporter: t.cucinotta |

Re: toolbars Lock menu

I have created a patch at https://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/10283. On 23.09.2016 00:47, Guillaume Munch wrote: Le 22/09/2016 à 09:18, racoon a écrit : On 21.09.2016 17:24, Guillaume Munch wrote: * I expected to find the lock toolbar option when right-clicking on the toolbars. Do you know where

Re: ctest seminar

On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 06:37:53PM +0100, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote: > Hello, > > I've setup the test machinery on my Debian Jessie, TeXLive 2016: > * ran automake in /ext/lyx/master > * ran cmake on Debian Jessie in /ext/lyx/cbuildmaster as > > /ext/lyx/cbuildmaster$ cmake

Re: [LyX/master] lettre: remove old workaround about page format in layout and update template

On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 07:14:38PM +0100, Jean-Pierre Chrétien wrote: > Le 08/10/2016 à 18:03, Jean-Pierre Chrétien a écrit : > > Le 08/10/2016 à 15:28, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 01:57:27PM +0200, jpc wrote: > > > > > > > > > > -Format 60 > > > > +Format 68 > > > >

Re: ctests: 4 failing "Unicode-characters" tests

On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 02:59:46PM +, Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2016-10-08, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > The following tests fail for me: > > > 281 - export/export/latex/Unicode-characters/084-misc-symbols-utf8_pdf2 > > (Failed) > > 285 - > >

Re: [LyX/master] lettre: remove old workaround about page format in layout and update template

Le 08/10/2016 à 18:03, Jean-Pierre Chrétien a écrit : Le 08/10/2016 à 15:28, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 01:57:27PM +0200, jpc wrote: -Format 60 +Format 68 Did you intent to make this change? I think the current format number is 60. You're right of course, I don't

ctest seminar

Hello, I've setup the test machinery on my Debian Jessie, TeXLive 2016: * ran automake in /ext/lyx/master * ran cmake on Debian Jessie in /ext/lyx/cbuildmaster as /ext/lyx/cbuildmaster$ cmake -DLYX_ENABLE_EXPORT_TESTS=ON -DLYX_RELEASE=ON -DLYX_PROGRAM_SUFFIX=ON -DLYX_ENABLE_CXX11=AUTO

Re: [LyX/master] lettre: remove old workaround about page format in layout and update template

Le 08/10/2016 à 15:28, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 01:57:27PM +0200, jpc wrote: -Format 60 +Format 68 Did you intent to make this change? I think the current format number is 60. You're right of course, I don't know where I could see the 68 value. I will correct

Re: ctests: 4 failing "Unicode-characters" tests

On 2016-10-08, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > The following tests fail for me: > 281 - export/export/latex/Unicode-characters/084-misc-symbols-utf8_pdf2 > (Failed) > 285 - > export/export/latex/Unicode-characters/087-90-misc-math-A-arrows-A-B-utf8_pdf2 > (Failed) > 287 - >

Re: [LyX/master] lettre: remove old workaround about page format in layout and update template

On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 01:57:27PM +0200, jpc wrote: > commit a214d95513567d9f0a7f8136b5ca4443db94431b > Author: jpc > Date: Thu Oct 6 13:52:16 2016 +0100 > >lettre: remove old workaround about page format in layout and update > template > --- > > -Format 60 > +Format

ctests: 4 failing "Unicode-characters" tests

The following tests fail for me: 281 - export/export/latex/Unicode-characters/084-misc-symbols-utf8_pdf2 (Failed) 285 - export/export/latex/Unicode-characters/087-90-misc-math-A-arrows-A-B-utf8_pdf2 (Failed) 287 -

Re: [patch] Factor out magic zoom minimum to a const member

On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 11:02:17AM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 11:41:25PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > The attached patch is simple but I have not made a change like this > > before so I wanted to check on the list. > > In general, all capitals is used for

Re: Should forward search (re)?generate preview if needed?

On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 03:30:00PM +0200, Guillaume Munch wrote: > I'd like forward-search to remain lightweight. Sometimes compilation is very > long. But maybe the message "Couldn't proceed" could be made clearer. OK. Scott. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: LyX docs: cleaning up math options

On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 08:17:04AM +, Guenter Milde wrote: > I don't know whether this is the intention here, but I would give Uwe as > maintainer the say about the correct settings. OK, I CC'ed Uwe. I won't make any changes until we hear from him. In fact, if you are very against the

Re: Should forward search (re)?generate preview if needed?

Le 07/10/2016 à 03:47, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 01:55:46PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: I am still a newcommer to the forward search feature, and am enjoying it a lot. Sometimes forward search does not work (even though it is enabled) [1]. For example, if you have not

Re: [patch] Factor out magic zoom minimum to a const member

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 11:41:25PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > The attached patch is simple but I have not made a change like this > before so I wanted to check on the list. In general, all capitals is used for preprocessor macros and in LyX private mambers have a trailing underscore. So, I

Re: LyX docs: cleaning up math options

On 2016-10-08, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 07:53:13PM +, Guenter Milde wrote: >> It does not suffice to test whether compilation runs without an error. >> This does in no way guarantee that the output is OK. > I see. I suppose it comes down to whether we think that the