Help!
I put \usepackage{cite} in the preamble of my thesis. It was working for a
while, and when I loaded up the thesis this morning, it wouldn't compile.
I'm getting an error for each \cite:
! Undefined control sequence.
\@make@cite@list ...\@B@citeB \relax \@citea {\bf
Help!
I put \usepackage{cite} in the preamble of my thesis. It was working for a
while, and when I loaded up the thesis this morning, it wouldn't compile.
I'm getting an error for each \cite:
! Undefined control sequence.
\@make@cite@list ...\@B@citeB \relax \@citea {\bf
Help!
I put \usepackage{cite} in the preamble of my thesis. It was working for a
while, and when I loaded up the thesis this morning, it wouldn't compile.
I'm getting an error for each \cite:
! Undefined control sequence.
\@make@cite@list ...\@B@citeB \relax \@citea {\bf
RevTeX 4, which is the American Physical Society's class(es) for LaTeX2e, is
currently in its fourth beta, which they claim will be the last. Those of
you who've been around for a while will recall that RevTeX 3 worked only
with LaTeX209, which required various kludges to work with LyX.
Happily,
RevTeX 4, which is the American Physical Society's class(es) for LaTeX2e, is
currently in its fourth beta, which they claim will be the last. Those of
you who've been around for a while will recall that RevTeX 3 worked only
with LaTeX209, which required various kludges to work with LyX.
Happily,
RevTeX 4, which is the American Physical Society's class(es) for LaTeX2e, is
currently in its fourth beta, which they claim will be the last. Those of
you who've been around for a while will recall that RevTeX 3 worked only
with LaTeX209, which required various kludges to work with LyX.
Happily,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 12:34:06PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Amir" == Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you add a number to your equations, I guess you mean a label too?
Well, I don't need every equation to have a unique \ref, but yes, I want
them to be numbere
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 04:34:21PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Amir" == Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why would you like to number every single equation when you will not
refer to them? Just for the pleasure to have an equation numbered
(4.5.103)? I even wrote
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 05:31:40PM +0100, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote:
While we're at it, Customization has a *very* short description of the bind
files. (It says to look at the bind files to see how they work.) For
example, how do I know what ~S means in a bind file? Or is there another doc
For those wondering what ~S in a bind-file means, from what I can tell, it
would mean anything *except* shift. Except that according to the comments in
kb_sequence::addkey, it's currently unused. By the way, the problem with
using ~S for "" is that on a standard American keyboard, you *have* to
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 12:34:06PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Amir" == Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you add a number to your equations, I guess you mean a label too?
Well, I don't need every equation to have a unique \ref, but yes, I want
them to be numbere
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 04:34:21PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Amir" == Amir Karger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why would you like to number every single equation when you will not
refer to them? Just for the pleasure to have an equation numbered
(4.5.103)? I even wrote
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 05:31:40PM +0100, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote:
While we're at it, Customization has a *very* short description of the bind
files. (It says to look at the bind files to see how they work.) For
example, how do I know what ~S means in a bind file? Or is there another doc
For those wondering what ~S in a bind-file means, from what I can tell, it
would mean anything *except* shift. Except that according to the comments in
kb_sequence::addkey, it's currently unused. By the way, the problem with
using ~S for "" is that on a standard American keyboard, you *have* to
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 12:34:06PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> If you add a number to your equations, I guess you mean a label too?
Well, I don't need every equation to have a unique \
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 04:34:21PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Why would you like to number every single equation when you will not
> refer to them? Just for the pleasure to have an
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 05:31:40PM +0100, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote:
>
> >>While we're at it, Customization has a *very* short description of the bind
> >>files. (It says to look at the bind files to see how they work.) For
> >>example, how do I know what ~S means in a bind file? Or is there
For those wondering what ~S in a bind-file means, from what I can tell, it
would mean anything *except* shift. Except that according to the comments in
kb_sequence::addkey, it's currently unused. By the way, the problem with
using ~S for ">" is that on a standard American keyboard, you *have* to
Dumb question.
Do I have to type math-number in the minibuffer for every single equation in
my whole document? (Or use a perl script to change \[ to \begin{equation}?)
I can't imagine that's the case. I know a bunch of people have written their
theses in lyx already. So what's the secret?o
Dumb question.
Do I have to type math-number in the minibuffer for every single equation in
my whole document? (Or use a perl script to change \[ to \begin{equation}?)
I can't imagine that's the case. I know a bunch of people have written their
theses in lyx already. So what's the secret?o
Dumb question.
Do I have to type math-number in the minibuffer for every single equation in
my whole document? (Or use a perl script to change \[ to \begin{equation}?)
I can't imagine that's the case. I know a bunch of people have written their
theses in lyx already. So what's the secret?o
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 08:59:47PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Finally we have LyX version 1.0.4 ready.
Yay!
www.lyx.org should probably replace the 1.0.3 release with something like:
--
LyX v1.0.4 was released on September 29, 1999
This is mostly a bug fix
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 08:59:47PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Finally we have LyX version 1.0.4 ready.
Yay!
www.lyx.org should probably replace the 1.0.3 release with something like:
--
LyX v1.0.4 was released on September 29, 1999
This is mostly a bug fix
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 08:59:47PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
> Finally we have LyX version 1.0.4 ready.
Yay!
www.lyx.org should probably replace the 1.0.3 release with something like:
--
LyX v1.0.4 was released on September 29, 1999
This is mostly a bug fix
24 matches
Mail list logo
