Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 05:00:16PM +0100, José Matos wrote: Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). As it happened previously I am asking for help to guarantee that

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 02:50:23PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 05:00:16PM +0100, José Matos wrote: Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2).

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 05:00:16PM +0100, José Matos wrote: Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). As it happened previously I am asking for help to guarantee that

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 02:50:23PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 05:00:16PM +0100, José Matos wrote: >> >>> Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the >>> problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 11:12:40PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed to note that it's explicitly for Mac). Note that compiling with make -j3

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Andre Poenitz wrote: On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 11:12:40PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed to note that it's explicitly for Mac). Note that

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 01:04:16PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: Typically -j3 is a better choice than -j2 on dual core machines, as not everything is processor-bound. Sure, maybe the reason. Note that multiple concurrent processes intensively accessing one resource (say memory or disk)

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Andre Poenitz wrote: On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 01:04:16PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: Typically -j3 is a better choice than -j2 on dual core machines, as not everything is processor-bound. Sure, maybe the reason. Note that multiple concurrent processes intensively accessing one

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 11:12:40PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > "Bennett Helm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed > >> to note that it's explicitly for Mac). > > > > Note that

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 11:12:40PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: >> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> >> > "Bennett Helm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > writes: >> > >> >> Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now >> >> renamed to note that it's explicitly

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 01:04:16PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > > Typically -j3 is a better choice than -j2 on dual core machines, as not > > everything is processor-bound. > > Sure, maybe the reason. Note that multiple concurrent processes intensively > accessing one resource (say memory

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Andre Poenitz wrote: On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 01:04:16PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: Typically -j3 is a better choice than -j2 on dual core machines, as not everything is processor-bound. Sure, maybe the reason. Note that multiple concurrent processes intensively accessing one

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed to note that it's explicitly for Mac). Note that compiling with make -j3 is much faster on double core machines. JMarc

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 6:53 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed to note that it's explicitly for Mac). Note that compiling with make -j3 is much faster on double

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed to note that it's explicitly for Mac). Note that compiling with make -j3 is much faster on double core machines. faster than -j2 or was it a typo?

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Friday 06 June 2008 22:12:40 Alfredo Braunstein wrote: faster than -j2 or was it a typo? Usually, yes. I use even -j4 on the desktop dual core. A/ -- José Abílio

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: On Friday 06 June 2008 22:12:40 Alfredo Braunstein wrote: faster than -j2 or was it a typo? Usually, yes. I use even -j4 on the desktop dual core. Good to know... I wonder why. A/

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Alfredo Braunstein wrote: José Matos wrote: On Friday 06 June 2008 22:12:40 Alfredo Braunstein wrote: faster than -j2 or was it a typo? Usually, yes. I use even -j4 on the desktop dual core. Good to know... I wonder why. My understanding is that launching 2

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Le 6 juin 08 à 23:12, Alfredo Braunstein a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Note that compiling with make -j3 is much faster on double core machines. faster than -j2 or was it a typo? Yes, it is a bit faster. JMarc

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

"Bennett Helm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed to > note that it's explicitly for Mac). Note that compiling with "make -j3" is much faster on double core machines. JMarc

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 6:53 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Bennett Helm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed > to > > note that it's explicitly for Mac). > > Note that compiling with "make -j3" is much

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > "Bennett Helm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Yes, that indeed works. I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed >> to note that it's explicitly for Mac). > > Note that compiling with "make -j3" is much faster on double core > machines. faster than -j2 or

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Friday 06 June 2008 22:12:40 Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > faster than -j2 or was it a typo? Usually, yes. I use even -j4 on the desktop dual core. > A/ -- José Abílio

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: > On Friday 06 June 2008 22:12:40 Alfredo Braunstein wrote: >> faster than -j2 or was it a typo? > > Usually, yes. I use even -j4 on the desktop dual core. Good to know... I wonder why. A/

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Alfredo Braunstein wrote: José Matos wrote: On Friday 06 June 2008 22:12:40 Alfredo Braunstein wrote: faster than -j2 or was it a typo? Usually, yes. I use even -j4 on the desktop dual core. Good to know... I wonder why. My understanding is that launching 2

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Le 6 juin 08 à 23:12, Alfredo Braunstein a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Note that compiling with "make -j3" is much faster on double core machines. faster than -j2 or was it a typo? Yes, it is a bit faster. JMarc

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P.S. I copied the attached script section by section into Terminal. When executing or source'ing the script, for some reason configure reported some errors. It

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed to note that it's explicitly for Mac). Thanks for the cleaning-up! I would suggest the follwing changes (see attached): 1) The HostSystemIntel and HostSystemPPC variables should NOT be changed ever as long as we support

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: P.S. I copied the attached script section by section into Terminal. When executing or source'ing the script, for some reason configure reported some errors.

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: I'm attaching the corrected script (now renamed to note that it's explicitly for Mac). Thanks for the cleaning-up! I would suggest the follwing changes (see attached): 1) The HostSystemIntel and HostSystemPPC variables should NOT be changed ever as long as we support

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 10:45:47PM +0200, Konrad Hofbauer wrote: This is due to the fact that in the user guide the symbol '·' is used rather than the macro \cdot, and there was a bug in the recent support for unicode symbols in math. Now '·' gets translated to \cdot

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:33:53AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:16:48AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: rgheck wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 05:00:16PM +0100, José Matos wrote: Hi all, as

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). As it happened previously I am asking for help to guarantee that there are no embarrassing bugs. I

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Same result her on PPC 10.4. Could the UserGuide-problems be due to: http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3938 Anders On 2 jun 2008, at 23.02, Konrad Hofbauer wrote: José Matos wrote: as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). Windows binaries are available at http://www.lyx.org/~joost/ Joost

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But in any case: I assume the arch builds should be based on José's official tar-balls, without any additional patches applied (or otherwise be termed 1.6.0svnx), correct? Yes, as far as possible (in particular for bugs that affect all

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 11:40:10 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Yes, as far as possible (in particular for bugs that affect all architectures). Architecture dependent fixes are acceptable. JMarc Yes and yes. :-) -- José Abílio

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 01:10:49 Pavel Sanda wrote: no, this means that it is ok to build beta2 wininstaller and announce it on _devel_ list even before the green light. Yes. with annoucements for users should arch builders wait for green light from Jose (which is the message in the

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Monday 02 June 2008 17:39:34 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: In the future, I think you should tag a betaXrc1 before tagging betaX, as stupid as it may seem (or just package a particular svn revision). In the past we have never announced beta versions in the users list. This sort of

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: The green light will be given based on the feedback that we get in the developers list. ok, and what do you plan now :) ? pavel

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Monday 02 June 2008 17:39:34 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: In the future, I think you should tag a betaXrc1 before tagging betaX, as stupid as it may seem (or just package a particular svn revision). In the past we have never announced beta versions

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 13:05:58 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: OK, so what you could have tried is to package some rX revision, let people try it, and tag beta2 from it if there are no brown paper bag issues. OK, the only issue is that the default options change if we are using a beta or

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 12:40:10 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: The green light will be given based on the feedback that we get in the developers list. ok, and what do you plan now :) ? pavel The only glaring remaining problem was the update problem from lyx2lyx. This was fixed by

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: On Tuesday 03 June 2008 13:05:58 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: OK, so what you could have tried is to package some rX revision, let people try it, and tag beta2 from it if there are no brown paper bag issues. OK, the only issue is that the default options change if

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: On Tuesday 03 June 2008 12:40:10 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: The green light will be given based on the feedback that we get in the developers list. ok, and what do you plan now :) ? pavel The only glaring remaining problem was the update problem from

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Would it be worth to release beta 3 with this problem fixed or should we publically announce beta 2 remarking the known problems? i would vote for beta 3 if you are able to prepare it very soon. otherwise next development bring new bugs we will never release

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: On Tuesday 03 June 2008 12:40:10 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: The green light will be given based on the feedback that we get in the developers list. ok, and what do you plan now :) ? pavel The only glaring remaining

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Abdelrazak Younes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2) change the configure.ac to the release tag, and works for some days in that state before reverting to svn after tagging the release. 2) sounds good as it also convey the information as a mini-freeze. +1 JMarc

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bennett, Anders, please find at http://www2.spsc.tugraz.at/people/hofbauer/lyx/LyX-Mac-1.6.0beta2.zip a universal binary built on Mac OS X

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: I can now confirm that it also works on PPC-10.4. Good. That was with the version that YOU built on 10.5? If so, that means that you can (and should) build the release version yourself again, right? That might also solve the crash occurring with George. /Konrad

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: Yes. I've posted a Mac package here: LyX-1.6.0b2-Mac-Univ.. http://edisk.fandm.edu/bennett.helm/LyX/LyX-1.6.0b2-Mac-Universal.dmg Konrad and Anders, could you both test it -- running the installer as well -- to see if it works for you? Works fine here on Intel Mac OS X

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bennett Helm wrote: Yes. I've posted a Mac package here: LyX-1.6.0b2-Mac-Univ.. http://edisk.fandm.edu/bennett.helm/LyX/LyX-1.6.0b2-Mac-Universal.dmg Konrad and Anders, could you both test it -- running the

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: If so, that means that you can (and should) build the release version yourself again, right? Yes, at least to the can part. ... And should because of the following reason. That might also solve the crash occurring with George. I hope so. I'm now

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bennett Helm wrote: I can now confirm that it also works on PPC-10.4. Good. That was with the version that YOU built on 10.5? Yes. I've posted a Mac package here:

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On 3 jun 2008, at 16.15, Bennett Helm wrote: On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bennett Helm wrote: I can now confirm that it also works on PPC-10.4. Good. That was with the version that YOU built on 10.5? Yes. I've posted a Mac package here:

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P.S. I copied the attached script section by section into Terminal. When executing or source'ing the script, for some reason configure reported some errors. It seems there were some stray invisible characters in there.

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Anders Ekberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Btw there's one more mall quirk: When opening a new document the top line is partly hidden by the toolbar, i.e. the crolling i wrong. I think I remember this being mentioned before, but can't find it in bugzilla.

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On 3 jun 2008, at 18.20, Bennett Helm wrote: - In the tutorial there are some button-figures missing I don't see this. Is it just that the graphics aren't displaying for you? Strange, now it works... Before some figures where replaced by black squares, but now it's fine. Anyway no big deal

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Anders Ekberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3 jun 2008, at 16.15, Bennett Helm wrote: On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bennett Helm wrote: I can now confirm that it also works on PPC-10.4. Good. That was with the

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P.S. I copied the attached script section by section into Terminal. When executing or source'ing the script, for some reason configure reported some

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P.S. I copied the attached script section by section into Terminal. When

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 14:17:56 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: 2) sounds good as it also convey the information as a mini-freeze. +1 Fair enough. I will try this for the next release. :-) JMarc -- José Abílio

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 13:53:39 Pavel Sanda wrote: for example today is so beautiful sunny day that i can even smell beta3 in the air don't you think? :)) pavel I do. :-) I will expand this in a new thread. -- José Abílio

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 10:45:47PM +0200, Konrad Hofbauer wrote: > This is due to the fact that in the user guide the symbol '·' is used rather than the macro \cdot, and there was a bug in the recent support for unicode symbols in math. Now '·' gets translated to

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:33:53AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:16:48AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: >> >>> rgheck wrote: >>> Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 05:00:16PM +0100, José Matos wrote:

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Hi all, > as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that > appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). > > As it happened previously I am asking for help to guarantee that there > are no >

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Same result her on PPC 10.4. Could the UserGuide-problems be due to: http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3938 Anders On 2 jun 2008, at 23.02, Konrad Hofbauer wrote: José Matos wrote: as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). Windows binaries are available at http://www.lyx.org/~joost/ Joost

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But in any case: I assume the arch builds should be based on José's > official tar-balls, without any additional patches applied (or > otherwise be termed 1.6.0svnx), correct? Yes, as far as possible (in particular for bugs that affect all

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 11:40:10 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Yes, as far as possible (in particular for bugs that affect all > architectures). Architecture dependent fixes are acceptable. > > JMarc Yes and yes. :-) -- José Abílio

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 01:10:49 Pavel Sanda wrote: > no, this means that it is ok to build beta2 wininstaller and announce it on > _devel_ list even before the green light. Yes. > with annoucements for users should arch builders wait for green light from > Jose (which is the message in the

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Monday 02 June 2008 17:39:34 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > In the future, I think you should tag a betaXrc1 before tagging > betaX, as stupid as it may seem (or just package a particular svn > revision). In the past we have never announced beta versions in the users list. This sort of

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: > The green light will be given based on the feedback that we get in the > developers list. ok, and what do you plan now :) ? pavel

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Monday 02 June 2008 17:39:34 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> In the future, I think you should tag a betaXrc1 before tagging >> betaX, as stupid as it may seem (or just package a particular svn >> revision). > > In the past we have never announced beta

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 13:05:58 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > OK, so what you could have tried is to package some rX revision, > let people try it, and tag beta2 from it if there are no brown paper > bag issues. OK, the only issue is that the default options change if we are using a beta or

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 12:40:10 Pavel Sanda wrote: > José Matos wrote: > > The green light will be given based on the feedback that we get in the > > developers list. > > ok, and what do you plan now :) ? > pavel The only glaring remaining problem was the update problem from lyx2lyx. This was

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: On Tuesday 03 June 2008 13:05:58 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: OK, so what you could have tried is to package some rX revision, let people try it, and tag beta2 from it if there are no brown paper bag issues. OK, the only issue is that the default options change if

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: > On Tuesday 03 June 2008 12:40:10 Pavel Sanda wrote: > > José Matos wrote: > > > The green light will be given based on the feedback that we get in the > > > developers list. > > > > ok, and what do you plan now :) ? > > pavel > > The only glaring remaining problem was the

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Abdelrazak Younes wrote: >>> Would it be worth to release beta 3 with this problem fixed or should we >>> publically announce beta 2 remarking the known problems? >>> >> >> i would vote for beta 3 if you are able to prepare it very soon. >> otherwise next development bring new bugs we will

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: On Tuesday 03 June 2008 12:40:10 Pavel Sanda wrote: José Matos wrote: The green light will be given based on the feedback that we get in the developers list. ok, and what do you plan now :) ? pavel The only glaring remaining

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> 2) change the configure.ac to the release tag, and works for some >> days in that state before reverting to svn after tagging the >> release. > > 2) sounds good as it also convey the information as a "mini-freeze". +1 JMarc

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Bennett, Anders, >> >> please find at >> >> a universal binary built

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: I can now confirm that it also works on PPC-10.4. Good. That was with the version that YOU built on 10.5? If so, that means that you can (and should) build the release version yourself again, right? That might also solve the crash occurring with George. /Konrad

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: Yes. I've posted a Mac package here: LyX-1.6.0b2-Mac-Univ..> Konrad and Anders, could you both test it -- running the installer as well -- to see if it works for you? Works fine here on Intel Mac

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bennett Helm wrote: > >> Yes. I've posted a Mac package here: >> >> LyX-1.6.0b2-Mac-Univ..> < >> http://edisk.fandm.edu/bennett.helm/LyX/LyX-1.6.0b2-Mac-Universal.dmg> >> >> Konrad and Anders, could you both test it --

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

Bennett Helm wrote: > If so, that means that you can (and should) build the release > version yourself again, right? > > > Yes, at least to the "can" part. ... And "should" because of the following reason. > That might also solve the crash occurring with George. > > > I hope so. I'm

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bennett Helm wrote: > >> I can now confirm that it also works on PPC-10.4. >> > > Good. That was with the version that YOU built on 10.5? Yes. I've posted a Mac package here:

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On 3 jun 2008, at 16.15, Bennett Helm wrote: On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Bennett Helm wrote: I can now confirm that it also works on PPC-10.4. Good. That was with the version that YOU built on 10.5? Yes. I've posted a Mac package here:

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > P.S. I copied the attached script section by section into Terminal. When > executing or source'ing the script, for some reason configure reported some > errors. > It seems there were some stray invisible characters in

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Anders Ekberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Btw there's one more mall quirk: When opening a new document the top line > is partly hidden by the toolbar, i.e. the crolling i wrong. I think I > remember this being mentioned before, but can't find it in bugzilla. >

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On 3 jun 2008, at 18.20, Bennett Helm wrote: - In the tutorial there are some button-figures missing I don't see this. Is it just that the graphics aren't displaying for you? Strange, now it works... Before some figures where replaced by black squares, but now it's fine. Anyway no big deal

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Anders Ekberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3 jun 2008, at 16.15, Bennett Helm wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> Bennett Helm wrote: >>> >>> I can now confirm that it also works on PPC-10.4.

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> P.S. I copied the attached script section by section into Terminal. When >> executing or source'ing the script, for some reason configure

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Konrad Hofbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> P.S. I copied the attached script section by section into

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 14:17:56 Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > 2) sounds good as it also convey the information as a "mini-freeze". > > +1 Fair enough. I will try this for the next release. :-) > JMarc -- José Abílio

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Tuesday 03 June 2008 13:53:39 Pavel Sanda wrote: > for example today is so beautiful sunny day that i can even smell beta3 in > the air don't you think? :)) > pavel I do. :-) I will expand this in a new thread. -- José Abílio

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). In the future, I think you should tag a betaXrc1 before tagging betaX, as stupid as it may seem (or just package

Beta 2 (private announcement)

Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). As it happened previously I am asking for help to guarantee that there are no embarrassing bugs. I mean in this case a failure to compile, on

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

José Matos wrote: Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). As it happened previously I am asking for help to guarantee that there are no embarrassing bugs. I mean in this case a failure to

Re: Beta 2 (private announcement)

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:00 PM, José Matos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, as discussed during the weekend and in order to fix the problems that appeared with beta 1 I have tagged a new release (beta 2). As it happened previously I am asking for help to guarantee that there

  1   2   >