Re: Fwd: Choice of fonts in LaTeX
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sam Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: (I assumed the Reply-to: would be the list) Bad assumption. The list isn't broken. Knuth also argues in METAFONT that slanted will make it easier for typeface designers to produce multiple faces from a single style. So can they get a slanted face out of an MM font? Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Fwd: Choice of fonts in LaTeX
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sam Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: (I assumed the Reply-to: would be the list) Bad assumption. The list isn't broken. Knuth also argues in METAFONT that slanted will make it easier for typeface designers to produce multiple faces from a single style. So can they get a slanted face out of an MM font? Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Fwd: Choice of fonts in LaTeX
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sam Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > (I assumed the Reply-to: would be the list) Bad assumption. The list isn't broken. > Knuth also argues in METAFONT that slanted will make it easier for > typeface designers to produce multiple faces from a single style. So can they get a slanted face out of an MM font? Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done basename is safer: for file in $(find . -name *.gif) do convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png done mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. Thoe other lists are (probably) in violation of RFC-2822. You should get into the habit of hitting Reply All to reply to the list. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
[drifting off-topic] In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using whitespace... Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size used by for to store the list of returned list of files. Running out of argument space always triggers my xargs detector: find foo -name '*.gif' -print0 | xargs -0 -n 1 convert -f gif Which has the advantage that it will work properly on files with newlines in the name. Note that this uses my open utility symlinked as convert, not the convert command that comes with Imagemagick. That just happens to do the right thing in this case. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
Thanks. I've just learnt something.
Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Depends on the shell. { and } are magic to csh and zsh, and need
quoting if you're using those. They aren't magic to sh, so they don't
need quoting if you're using that. I don't keep bash installed, so I
don't know if you need them with bash. As an ex-csh user, I quote them
out of habit.
But the basename invocation used by lars is wrong. It needs to be
$(basename {} .gif).png (I always use $(...); you have to to nest
command substitutions, and I find it a bit more readable). If you
leave out the .gif, you get the full filename.
Ain't scripting fun ;)
Your scripts work much better if you start them with #!/usr/bin/env python
:-).
mike
--
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Clever quotes
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rich Shepard [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Paul wrote: Is there a command-line tool that does this using some heuristics to cover most areas that could be problematic? Paul sed. tr, too, but sed would work. Something like s/[A-Z,a-z]?/``?/g. I didn't look at my sed book, but that reads, substitute two single backqotes when there's a plain double quote followed by a single character; do this globally. You want to test that it's not a period, but a letter. You want 's/\([A-Za-z]\)/``\1/g'. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done basename is safer: for file in $(find . -name *.gif) do convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png done mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other people have the same problem. Thoe other lists are (probably) in violation of RFC-2822. You should get into the habit of hitting Reply All to reply to the list. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
[drifting off-topic] In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using whitespace... Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size used by for to store the list of returned list of files. Running out of argument space always triggers my xargs detector: find foo -name '*.gif' -print0 | xargs -0 -n 1 convert -f gif Which has the advantage that it will work properly on files with newlines in the name. Note that this uses my open utility symlinked as convert, not the convert command that comes with Imagemagick. That just happens to do the right thing in this case. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| The problem is that for splits the returned list of files using
| whitespace...
find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
then (ha!)
Thanks. I've just learnt something.
Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Depends on the shell. { and } are magic to csh and zsh, and need
quoting if you're using those. They aren't magic to sh, so they don't
need quoting if you're using that. I don't keep bash installed, so I
don't know if you need them with bash. As an ex-csh user, I quote them
out of habit.
But the basename invocation used by lars is wrong. It needs to be
$(basename {} .gif).png (I always use $(...); you have to to nest
command substitutions, and I find it a bit more readable). If you
leave out the .gif, you get the full filename.
Ain't scripting fun ;)
Your scripts work much better if you start them with #!/usr/bin/env python
:-).
mike
--
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Clever quotes
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rich Shepard [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Paul wrote: Is there a command-line tool that does this using some heuristics to cover most areas that could be problematic? Paul sed. tr, too, but sed would work. Something like s/[A-Z,a-z]?/``?/g. I didn't look at my sed book, but that reads, substitute two single backqotes when there's a plain double quote followed by a single character; do this globally. You want to test that it's not a period, but a letter. You want 's/\([A-Za-z]\)/``\1/g'. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
RE: Lyx command line question: summarized
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sanders, Maarten (M.J.L.) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > 2) run, before you run pdflatex, something like > for FILE in `find . -name '*\.gif'`; do convert $FILE `echo $FILE | sed > 's/\(.*\.\)gif/\1png/'`; done basename is safer: for file in $(find . -name *.gif) do convert $file $(basename $file .gif).png done http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > Maybe it's just my mail client, but this list seems to default for a > reply to the sender instead of to the list, unlike all the other lists > I've ever been on. I accidently sent a reply intended for the list to > the sender and didn't realise until a few days later. So maybe other > people have the same problem. Thoe other lists are (probably) in violation of RFC-2822. You should get into the habit of hitting "Reply All" to reply to the list. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
[drifting off-topic] In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > The problem is that "for" splits the returned list of files using > whitespace... > > Perhaps the bigger problem is that you can overrun the internal array size > used by "for" to store the list of returned list of files. "Running out of argument space" always triggers my xargs detector: find foo -name '*.gif' -print0 | xargs -0 -n 1 convert -f gif Which has the advantage that it will work properly on files with newlines in the name. Note that this uses my "open" utility symlinked as "convert", not the "convert" command that comes with Imagemagick. That just happens to do the right thing in this case. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Lyx command line question: summarized
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> > | The problem is that "for" splits the returned list of files using
> > | whitespace...
> >
> > find foo -name \*.gif -print -exec convert {} `basename {}`.png \;
> > then (ha!)
>
> Thanks. I've just learnt something.
>
> Don't you have to quote the args passed to convert? Bet you still do.
Depends on the shell. { and } are magic to csh and zsh, and need
quoting if you're using those. They aren't magic to sh, so they don't
need quoting if you're using that. I don't keep bash installed, so I
don't know if you need them with bash. As an ex-csh user, I quote them
out of habit.
But the basename invocation used by lars is wrong. It needs to be
$(basename {} .gif).png (I always use $(...); you have to to nest
command substitutions, and I find it a bit more readable). If you
leave out the .gif, you get the full filename.
> Ain't scripting fun ;)
Your scripts work much better if you start them with #!/usr/bin/env python
:-).
http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Clever quotes
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich Shepard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Paul wrote: > > > Is there a command-line tool that does this using some heuristics to cover > > most areas that could be problematic? > > Paul > >sed. tr, too, but sed would work. Something like s/"[A-Z,a-z]?/``?/g. I > didn't look > at my sed book, but that reads, "substitute two single backqotes when there's > a plain double quote followed by a single character; do this globally." You > want to test that it's not a period, but a letter. You want 's/"\([A-Za-z]\)/``\1/g'. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Defining paragraph styles
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Mike Meyer wrote: Is there an easy way to redefine paragraph styles in Lyx? ... Well, you have sort of overlooked what I think is the point of LyX/LaTeX. But we'll skip that. The point being that authors should concentrate on content and logical markup, and typesetters/publishers should worry about how the final thing looks? Kind of (but not exactly) like the separation between HTML and CSS? Yeah, except that LaTeX predates the desktop publishing experiment, and didn't get polluted with by a phase of people trying to make it into a desktop publishing system. I'm wearing my typesetting hat at the moment, so does that mean that Lyx isn't really suitable for me - it's more designed for content creators? Sort of. LaTeX (which is what does the typesetting of the output) helps typesetters make it easy for content creators to create professional looking documents. Once you get into it, you'll find that it's provides more control than most WP systems (at least the ones I'm familiar with). If you're just not happy with what's available, and want to create a new style that you'll then use for many documents, that's pretty much normal. On the other hand, if you're going to be tweaking the output for every document you create, then you might be better off with something else. For one thing, getting just the look you want is harder in LaTeX than in a convention WP. For another, the style information isn't stored in the document, so you wind up having to create new style sheet for each deocument if you want to be able to recreate the ouput later on. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Defining paragraph styles
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Mike Meyer wrote: Is there an easy way to redefine paragraph styles in Lyx? ... Well, you have sort of overlooked what I think is the point of LyX/LaTeX. But we'll skip that. The point being that authors should concentrate on content and logical markup, and typesetters/publishers should worry about how the final thing looks? Kind of (but not exactly) like the separation between HTML and CSS? Yeah, except that LaTeX predates the desktop publishing experiment, and didn't get polluted with by a phase of people trying to make it into a desktop publishing system. I'm wearing my typesetting hat at the moment, so does that mean that Lyx isn't really suitable for me - it's more designed for content creators? Sort of. LaTeX (which is what does the typesetting of the output) helps typesetters make it easy for content creators to create professional looking documents. Once you get into it, you'll find that it's provides more control than most WP systems (at least the ones I'm familiar with). If you're just not happy with what's available, and want to create a new style that you'll then use for many documents, that's pretty much normal. On the other hand, if you're going to be tweaking the output for every document you create, then you might be better off with something else. For one thing, getting just the look you want is harder in LaTeX than in a convention WP. For another, the style information isn't stored in the document, so you wind up having to create new style sheet for each deocument if you want to be able to recreate the ouput later on. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Defining paragraph styles
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > Mike Meyer wrote: > >>Is there an easy way to redefine paragraph styles in Lyx? > ... > > Well, you have sort of overlooked what I think is the point of > > LyX/LaTeX. But we'll skip that. > The point being that authors should concentrate on content and logical > markup, and typesetters/publishers should worry about how the final > thing looks? Kind of (but not exactly) like the separation between HTML > and CSS? Yeah, except that LaTeX predates the desktop publishing experiment, and didn't get polluted with by a phase of people trying to make it into a desktop publishing system. > I'm wearing my typesetting hat at the moment, so does that mean that Lyx > isn't really suitable for me - it's more designed for content creators? Sort of. LaTeX (which is what does the typesetting of the output) helps typesetters make it easy for content creators to create professional looking documents. Once you get into it, you'll find that it's provides more control than most WP systems (at least the ones I'm familiar with). If you're just not happy with what's available, and want to create a new style that you'll then use for many documents, that's pretty much normal. On the other hand, if you're going to be tweaking the output for every document you create, then you might be better off with something else. For one thing, getting just the look you want is harder in LaTeX than in a convention WP. For another, the style information isn't stored in the document, so you wind up having to create new style sheet for each deocument if you want to be able to recreate the ouput later on. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Defining paragraph styles
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Is there an easy way to redefine paragraph styles in Lyx? I'm new to LyX and TeX, and I'm just trying to use it to typeset a book. It's going well, I'm using the book document class, I get a nice output, but now I want to change the chapter headings to a different size and font, say. Or give the body text paragraphs a different first line indent. In Word, for example, I would just go to the paragraph styles and either add my own or override an existing one. I've done some RTFM but I want to make sure I'm on the right track and I haven't overlooked something stupid. Well, you have sort of overlooked what I think is the point of LyX/LaTeX. But we'll skip that. Is it right that Word's paragraph styles are analogous to environments in LaTeX? Roughly. From various places it suggests creating .layout, .sty or .cls files but I'm not sure which - it seems a bit complicated for something so basic which makes me think I might be doing something wrong. Or do I just add some code to the LaTeX Preamble section in the Document Settings? Should I be creating my own class from scratch? Or just overriding parts of the basic book class? Could someone give me a basic example of changing the font used for the chapter headings? The first thing to understand is that there are two completely separate renderings in LyX. There's the rendering you get in the LyX window, and the rendering you get when you export to TeX. The former is controlled by the layout files. For each environment, you set the fonts, sizes, etc, and that sets how it's displayed in LyX. The look when it's renderd by LaTeX is controlled by the .sty and .cls files. In your case, you need to look into the book.cls file. You'll want to copy it into a private part of the search path and change the name so you don't screw up other documents that want to use the original book class. Ditto for the layout file. You'll want to edit those to change the names as appopriate. It's only the output I'm worried about - it doesn't matter how it looks in LyX. So the only changes you need to make to the layout file are to get it to use the correct class file for the output. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Defining paragraph styles
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Is there an easy way to redefine paragraph styles in Lyx? I'm new to LyX and TeX, and I'm just trying to use it to typeset a book. It's going well, I'm using the book document class, I get a nice output, but now I want to change the chapter headings to a different size and font, say. Or give the body text paragraphs a different first line indent. In Word, for example, I would just go to the paragraph styles and either add my own or override an existing one. I've done some RTFM but I want to make sure I'm on the right track and I haven't overlooked something stupid. Well, you have sort of overlooked what I think is the point of LyX/LaTeX. But we'll skip that. Is it right that Word's paragraph styles are analogous to environments in LaTeX? Roughly. From various places it suggests creating .layout, .sty or .cls files but I'm not sure which - it seems a bit complicated for something so basic which makes me think I might be doing something wrong. Or do I just add some code to the LaTeX Preamble section in the Document Settings? Should I be creating my own class from scratch? Or just overriding parts of the basic book class? Could someone give me a basic example of changing the font used for the chapter headings? The first thing to understand is that there are two completely separate renderings in LyX. There's the rendering you get in the LyX window, and the rendering you get when you export to TeX. The former is controlled by the layout files. For each environment, you set the fonts, sizes, etc, and that sets how it's displayed in LyX. The look when it's renderd by LaTeX is controlled by the .sty and .cls files. In your case, you need to look into the book.cls file. You'll want to copy it into a private part of the search path and change the name so you don't screw up other documents that want to use the original book class. Ditto for the layout file. You'll want to edit those to change the names as appopriate. It's only the output I'm worried about - it doesn't matter how it looks in LyX. So the only changes you need to make to the layout file are to get it to use the correct class file for the output. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Defining paragraph styles
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > Is there an easy way to redefine paragraph styles in Lyx? > > I'm new to LyX and TeX, and I'm just trying to use it to typeset a book. > It's going well, I'm using the "book" document class, I get a nice > output, but now I want to change the chapter headings to a different > size and font, say. Or give the body text paragraphs a different first > line indent. > > In Word, for example, I would just go to the paragraph styles and either > add my own or override an existing one. > > I've done some RTFM but I want to make sure I'm on the right track and I > haven't overlooked something stupid. Well, you have sort of overlooked what I think is the point of LyX/LaTeX. But we'll skip that. > Is it right that Word's paragraph styles are analogous to "environments" > in LaTeX? Roughly. > >From various places it suggests creating .layout, .sty or .cls files but > I'm not sure which - it seems a bit complicated for something so basic > which makes me think I might be doing something wrong. Or do I just add > some code to the LaTeX Preamble section in the Document Settings? Should > I be creating my own class from scratch? Or just overriding parts of the > basic "book" class? Could someone give me a basic example of changing > the font used for the chapter headings? The first thing to understand is that there are two completely separate renderings in LyX. There's the rendering you get in the LyX window, and the rendering you get when you export to TeX. The former is controlled by the layout files. For each environment, you set the fonts, sizes, etc, and that sets how it's displayed in LyX. The look when it's renderd by LaTeX is controlled by the .sty and .cls files. In your case, you need to look into the book.cls file. You'll want to copy it into a private part of the search path and change the name so you don't screw up other documents that want to use the original book class. Ditto for the layout file. You'll want to edit those to change the names as appopriate. > It's only the output I'm worried about - it doesn't matter how it looks > in LyX. So the only changes you need to make to the layout file are to get it to use the correct class file for the output. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Poor men's scientific workplace.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rich Shepard [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: One of the biggest hurdles for users to pass is the compulsion to tweak minor appearance details. My explanation of the LaTeX/LyX philosphy is: Word processors make it easy to get the pages that look exactly like you want them to. LaTeX/LyX makes it easy to get professional looking pages. Unless you're a professional designer of such, the two will be unrelated. Decide which you want, and use the right tool for the job. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Poor men's scientific workplace.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rich Shepard [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: One of the biggest hurdles for users to pass is the compulsion to tweak minor appearance details. My explanation of the LaTeX/LyX philosphy is: Word processors make it easy to get the pages that look exactly like you want them to. LaTeX/LyX makes it easy to get professional looking pages. Unless you're a professional designer of such, the two will be unrelated. Decide which you want, and use the right tool for the job. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Poor men's scientific workplace.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich Shepard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: >One of the biggest hurdles for users to pass is the compulsion to tweak > minor appearance details. My explanation of the LaTeX/LyX philosphy is: Word processors make it easy to get the pages that look exactly like you want them to. LaTeX/LyX makes it easy to get professional looking pages. Unless you're a professional designer of such, the two will be unrelated. Decide which you want, and use the right tool for the job. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx to OO conversion tool?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Nicol [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Can someone please point me to a tool that will convert a LyX document to a soffice document, no matter how rough the tool is? When I asked this earli this month, the only thing that came up was tex4ht. I tried it, but it didn't do a very good job for me. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx to OO conversion tool?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Luis Rivera [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Nicol [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Can someone please point me to a tool that will convert a LyX document to a soffice document, no matter how rough the tool is? When I asked this earli this month, the only thing that came up was tex4ht. I tried it, but it didn't do a very good job for me. I tried it, and it worked for me... sort of. That's about the most that you can say for what it did for me as well. So, first, export your LyX file into LaTeX. Then install a recent tex4ht system, and run `oolatex yourfile'. I tried that. It turned all my paragraphs and subparagraphs into empty environments. Not very useful. I haven't had time to chase it since then. One thing you might consider that got sent to me: From: Andre Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED] For an easy conversion, put these into your LyX preferences file: \converter latex sxw oolatex $$i latex \format sxw sxw OpenOffice \viewer sxw open The viewer may need to be something other than open, depending on your environment. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx to OO conversion tool?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Nicol [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Can someone please point me to a tool that will convert a LyX document to a soffice document, no matter how rough the tool is? When I asked this earli this month, the only thing that came up was tex4ht. I tried it, but it didn't do a very good job for me. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx to OO conversion tool?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Luis Rivera [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Nicol [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Can someone please point me to a tool that will convert a LyX document to a soffice document, no matter how rough the tool is? When I asked this earli this month, the only thing that came up was tex4ht. I tried it, but it didn't do a very good job for me. I tried it, and it worked for me... sort of. That's about the most that you can say for what it did for me as well. So, first, export your LyX file into LaTeX. Then install a recent tex4ht system, and run `oolatex yourfile'. I tried that. It turned all my paragraphs and subparagraphs into empty environments. Not very useful. I haven't had time to chase it since then. One thing you might consider that got sent to me: From: Andre Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED] For an easy conversion, put these into your LyX preferences file: \converter latex sxw oolatex $$i latex \format sxw sxw OpenOffice \viewer sxw open The viewer may need to be something other than open, depending on your environment. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx to OO conversion tool?
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > Can someone please point me to a tool that will convert a LyX document > to a soffice document, no matter how rough the tool is? When I asked this earli this month, the only thing that came up was tex4ht. I tried it, but it didn't do a very good job for me. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx to OO conversion tool?
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Luis Rivera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Nicol > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > > > Can someone please point me to a tool that will convert a LyX document > > > to a soffice document, no matter how rough the tool is? > > > > When I asked this earli this month, the only thing that came up was > > tex4ht. I tried it, but it didn't do a very good job for me. > I tried it, and it worked for me... sort of. That's about the most that you can say for what it did for me as well. > So, first, export your LyX file into LaTeX. Then install a recent tex4ht > system, and run `oolatex >yourfile<'. I tried that. It turned all my paragraphs and subparagraphs into empty environments. Not very useful. I haven't had time to chase it since then. One thing you might consider that got sent to me: From: Andre Berger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For an "easy" conversion, put these into your LyX preferences file: > > \converter "latex" "sxw" "oolatex $$i" "latex" > \format "sxw" "sxw" "OpenOffice" "" > \viewer "sxw" "open" The viewer may need to be something other than "open", depending on your environment. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Open, take two
Ok, I know this is a strange place to announce a new Unix tool. But LyX is the inspiration for this, and workinng well with LyX is a high priority. I'd like to get feedback from LyX users early, so please bear with me. To provide some motivation for looking at this, here's an excerpt from my .lyx/preferences: bhuda% cd ~/.lyx bhuda% grep open preferences \viewer dvi open \viewer eps open \viewer html open \viewer pdf open \viewer ps open \viewer rtf open bhuda% grep convert preferences \converter latex dvi convert -f dvi $$i \converter latex html convert -f html $$i originaldir,needaux \converter ps pdf convert -f pdf $$i \converter latex rtf convert -f rtf $$i Note that this does require Python 2.4. Depending on feedback, that may change. Here's the announcement as used elsewhere open is designed to provide Unix users with a single tool for dealing with the multitude of applications that deal with data files. Without open - or something like it - every time a user wants to look at a file, they have to figure out what type the file is and which application on their path can open that file, and then invoke that application with the appropriate arguments. Likewise, every application that uses external applications has it's own database of file types and applications. Applications developers have to choose a format for the database, write code to parse it, and provide a GUI for editing it. This not only represents a duplication of effort, but requires the user to tell every application how to deal with each type of file, meaning they have to learn multiple different tools for dealing with this information. open was designed to solve these problems. If the user wants to open a file, they just invoke open on it. To edit it, they just invoke open -c edit (or edit if they've installed it that way). Open will figure out which application they want to use for this, and arrange that it gets called appropriately. If open can't find an application, it'll ask the user to choose one, and save that choice for future reference. For applications, open provides an API that takes care of the entire problem. There's no need to parse a configuration file, provide facilities for editing the configuration file, ensure the consistency of the configuration file, or any such thing. The application merely hands the file name to open, and open does the rest. Further, the API is one that any program that has to deal with external applications already deals with - launching an external application on a file. So users can start getting the benefit of using open even if none of the applications they have installed know about it - all they have to do is tell each application to use open for everything. Hopefully, applications will start checking for and using open as an external viewer by default, removing even that burden from the user. The benefits to the user are multifold. They only have to learn one interface for configuring the invocation of external programs. If they install a new foo viewer, and decide they want to use that for viewing foos everywhere, they only have to change it in one place - the open database. Users can quit worrying about What application opens this file at the command line. Well, most of the time. Instead, they just do open filename, and let open sort it out. It's not got it's own web page yet. The tarball can be found at URL: http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.2.tar.gz . Discussionn shold take place off-list. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Open, take two
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bo Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: open is designed to provide Unix users with a single tool for dealing with the multitude of applications that deal with data files. Without open - or something like it Under windows/dos, this is called start. Anyway, how do you determine the application to use? Are you using something like MIME types? And under OS X, it's called open, but it's not as powerful as what I've written. Nope - I don't have a mime type handy. I use the files extension. I do know those aren't unique, and have already located tools for doing more sophisticated determination of a files type. But that's for later. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Open, take two
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andre Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: * Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2005-09-19 06:40 +0200: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bo Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: [...] And under OS X, it's called open, but it's not as powerful as what I've written. Give it a different name to avoid unnecessary confusion. Got any suggestions? Launch is less accurate and also already taken by an OSS replacement for open on OSX. I don't like start - it's less accurate as well. display might work, but it's also already taken, by something comletely different. Likewise, the two alternative names that open already supports - edit and convert exist as commands. edit is a hard link to ee, and convert is an image conversion program that comes with ImageMagick. The names are important. The default action is the basename of the name the program was invoked as. So where open foo.gif might use xloadimage, edit foo.gif might invoke the gimp. Of course, you can install it as whatever you want and alias them to mwms-magic-file-opener -c open and mwms-magic-file-opener -c edit. But the longer it waits, the harder it is to change them. I'm waiting for the python crowd to object to using open as well. It's builtin in the language, and they frown on using those as variable names. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Open, take two
Ok, I know this is a strange place to announce a new Unix tool. But LyX is the inspiration for this, and workinng well with LyX is a high priority. I'd like to get feedback from LyX users early, so please bear with me. To provide some motivation for looking at this, here's an excerpt from my .lyx/preferences: bhuda% cd ~/.lyx bhuda% grep open preferences \viewer dvi open \viewer eps open \viewer html open \viewer pdf open \viewer ps open \viewer rtf open bhuda% grep convert preferences \converter latex dvi convert -f dvi $$i \converter latex html convert -f html $$i originaldir,needaux \converter ps pdf convert -f pdf $$i \converter latex rtf convert -f rtf $$i Note that this does require Python 2.4. Depending on feedback, that may change. Here's the announcement as used elsewhere open is designed to provide Unix users with a single tool for dealing with the multitude of applications that deal with data files. Without open - or something like it - every time a user wants to look at a file, they have to figure out what type the file is and which application on their path can open that file, and then invoke that application with the appropriate arguments. Likewise, every application that uses external applications has it's own database of file types and applications. Applications developers have to choose a format for the database, write code to parse it, and provide a GUI for editing it. This not only represents a duplication of effort, but requires the user to tell every application how to deal with each type of file, meaning they have to learn multiple different tools for dealing with this information. open was designed to solve these problems. If the user wants to open a file, they just invoke open on it. To edit it, they just invoke open -c edit (or edit if they've installed it that way). Open will figure out which application they want to use for this, and arrange that it gets called appropriately. If open can't find an application, it'll ask the user to choose one, and save that choice for future reference. For applications, open provides an API that takes care of the entire problem. There's no need to parse a configuration file, provide facilities for editing the configuration file, ensure the consistency of the configuration file, or any such thing. The application merely hands the file name to open, and open does the rest. Further, the API is one that any program that has to deal with external applications already deals with - launching an external application on a file. So users can start getting the benefit of using open even if none of the applications they have installed know about it - all they have to do is tell each application to use open for everything. Hopefully, applications will start checking for and using open as an external viewer by default, removing even that burden from the user. The benefits to the user are multifold. They only have to learn one interface for configuring the invocation of external programs. If they install a new foo viewer, and decide they want to use that for viewing foos everywhere, they only have to change it in one place - the open database. Users can quit worrying about What application opens this file at the command line. Well, most of the time. Instead, they just do open filename, and let open sort it out. It's not got it's own web page yet. The tarball can be found at URL: http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.2.tar.gz . Discussionn shold take place off-list. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Open, take two
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bo Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: open is designed to provide Unix users with a single tool for dealing with the multitude of applications that deal with data files. Without open - or something like it Under windows/dos, this is called start. Anyway, how do you determine the application to use? Are you using something like MIME types? And under OS X, it's called open, but it's not as powerful as what I've written. Nope - I don't have a mime type handy. I use the files extension. I do know those aren't unique, and have already located tools for doing more sophisticated determination of a files type. But that's for later. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Open, take two
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andre Berger [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: * Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2005-09-19 06:40 +0200: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bo Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: [...] And under OS X, it's called open, but it's not as powerful as what I've written. Give it a different name to avoid unnecessary confusion. Got any suggestions? Launch is less accurate and also already taken by an OSS replacement for open on OSX. I don't like start - it's less accurate as well. display might work, but it's also already taken, by something comletely different. Likewise, the two alternative names that open already supports - edit and convert exist as commands. edit is a hard link to ee, and convert is an image conversion program that comes with ImageMagick. The names are important. The default action is the basename of the name the program was invoked as. So where open foo.gif might use xloadimage, edit foo.gif might invoke the gimp. Of course, you can install it as whatever you want and alias them to mwms-magic-file-opener -c open and mwms-magic-file-opener -c edit. But the longer it waits, the harder it is to change them. I'm waiting for the python crowd to object to using open as well. It's builtin in the language, and they frown on using those as variable names. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Open, take two
Ok, I know this is a strange place to announce a new Unix tool. But LyX is the inspiration for this, and workinng well with LyX is a high priority. I'd like to get feedback from LyX users early, so please bear with me. To provide some motivation for looking at this, here's an excerpt from my .lyx/preferences: bhuda% cd ~/.lyx bhuda% grep open preferences \viewer "dvi" "open" \viewer "eps" "open" \viewer "html" "open" \viewer "pdf" "open" \viewer "ps" "open" \viewer "rtf" "open" bhuda% grep convert preferences \converter "latex" "dvi" "convert -f dvi $$i" "" \converter "latex" "html" "convert -f html $$i" "originaldir,needaux" \converter "ps" "pdf" "convert -f pdf $$i" "" \converter "latex" "rtf" "convert -f rtf $$i" "" Note that this does require Python 2.4. Depending on feedback, that may change. Here's the announcement as used elsewhere "open" is designed to provide Unix users with a single tool for dealing with the multitude of applications that deal with data files. Without open - or something like it - every time a user wants to look at a file, they have to figure out what type the file is and which application on their path can open that file, and then invoke that application with the appropriate arguments. Likewise, every application that uses external applications has it's own database of file types and applications. Applications developers have to choose a format for the database, write code to parse it, and provide a GUI for editing it. This not only represents a duplication of effort, but requires the user to tell every application how to deal with each type of file, meaning they have to learn multiple different tools for dealing with this information. "open" was designed to solve these problems. If the user wants to open a file, they just invoke "open" on it. To edit it, they just invoke "open -c edit" (or "edit" if they've installed it that way). Open will figure out which application they want to use for this, and arrange that it gets called appropriately. If open can't find an application, it'll ask the user to choose one, and save that choice for future reference. For applications, open provides an API that takes care of the entire problem. There's no need to parse a configuration file, provide facilities for editing the configuration file, ensure the consistency of the configuration file, or any such thing. The application merely hands the file name to "open", and "open" does the rest. Further, the API is one that any program that has to deal with external applications already deals with - launching an external application on a file. So users can start getting the benefit of using "open" even if none of the applications they have installed know about it - all they have to do is tell each application to use "open" for everything. Hopefully, applications will start checking for and using "open" as an external viewer by default, removing even that burden from the user. The benefits to the user are multifold. They only have to learn one interface for configuring the invocation of external programs. If they install a new foo viewer, and decide they want to use that for viewing foos everywhere, they only have to change it in one place - the "open" database. Users can quit worrying about "What application opens this file" at the command line. Well, most of the time. Instead, they just do "open ", and let open sort it out. It's not got it's own web page yet. The tarball can be found at http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.2.tar.gz >. Discussionn shold take place off-list. Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Open, take two
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > > "open" is designed to provide Unix users with a single tool for > > dealing with the multitude of applications that deal with data files. > > Without open - or something like it > Under windows/dos, this is called start. Anyway, how do you determine > the application to use? Are you using something like MIME types? And under OS X, it's called open, but it's not as powerful as what I've written. Nope - I don't have a mime type handy. I use the files extension. I do know those aren't unique, and have already located tools for doing more sophisticated determination of a files type. But that's for later. Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Open, take two
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andre Berger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > * Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2005-09-19 06:40 +0200: > > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > [...] > > And under OS X, it's called open, but it's not as powerful as what > > I've written. > Give it a different name to avoid unnecessary confusion. Got any suggestions? "Launch" is less accurate and also already taken by an OSS replacement for open on OSX. I don't like "start" - it's less accurate as well. "display" might work, but it's also already taken, by something comletely different. Likewise, the two alternative names that open already supports - "edit" and "convert" exist as commands. "edit" is a hard link to ee, and "convert" is an image conversion program that comes with ImageMagick. The names are important. The default action is the basename of the name the program was invoked as. So where "open foo.gif" might use xloadimage, "edit foo.gif" might invoke the gimp. Of course, you can install it as whatever you want and alias them to "mwms-magic-file-opener -c open" and "mwms-magic-file-opener -c edit". But the longer it waits, the harder it is to change them. I'm waiting for the python crowd to object to using "open" as well. It's builtin in the language, and they frown on using those as variable names. Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Portability to Neo/Open/Star Office?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Mike Meyer wrote: I haven't been able to find anything to handle the to part. Can someone provide me with pointers? In a pinch, they can read MSWord doc files in Writer. Try tex4ht. It has a mode to output OpenOffice files. That was fun. I've obviosly gotten spoiled by package systems. Anyway, the two conversion commands suggested here (thanks to you both!) give the same resul: all structural (and hence formating) information is lost. All the paragraphs are either Text body or First line indent. Paragaph and Subpagraph enviroments show up as empty. I suspect it has something to do with using a home-grown class. Copying article.ht4 to neodoc.ht4 - nedoc is a tweaked version of article - doesn't change anything. I think I've spent enough time on this today. Suggestions on where to look for clues would be appreciated. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Portability to Neo/Open/Star Office?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Mike Meyer wrote: I haven't been able to find anything to handle the to part. Can someone provide me with pointers? In a pinch, they can read MSWord doc files in Writer. Try tex4ht. It has a mode to output OpenOffice files. That was fun. I've obviosly gotten spoiled by package systems. Anyway, the two conversion commands suggested here (thanks to you both!) give the same resul: all structural (and hence formating) information is lost. All the paragraphs are either Text body or First line indent. Paragaph and Subpagraph enviroments show up as empty. I suspect it has something to do with using a home-grown class. Copying article.ht4 to neodoc.ht4 - nedoc is a tweaked version of article - doesn't change anything. I think I've spent enough time on this today. Suggestions on where to look for clues would be appreciated. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Portability to Neo/Open/Star Office?
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > Mike Meyer wrote: > > I haven't been able to find anything to handle the "to" part. Can > > someone provide me with pointers? In a pinch, they can read MSWord doc > > files in Writer. > Try tex4ht. It has a mode to output OpenOffice files. That was fun. I've obviosly gotten spoiled by package systems. Anyway, the two conversion commands suggested here (thanks to you both!) give the same resul: all structural (and hence formating) information is lost. All the paragraphs are either "Text body" or "First line indent". Paragaph and Subpagraph enviroments show up as empty. I suspect it has something to do with using a home-grown class. Copying article.ht4 to neodoc.ht4 - nedoc is a tweaked version of article - doesn't change anything. I think I've spent enough time on this today. Suggestions on where to look for clues would be appreciated. Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Portability to Neo/Open/Star Office?
I've got a project that requires exchanging documents with others using StarOffice Writer (or one of it's children). Part of the requirement is to get change bars as the document moves back and forth. 1.4.0 apparently has change bar support - I haven't tried it yet. That's excellent, and I have no problem running CVS versions of software. Howver, getting the things to/from Writer format is another matter entirely. I've turned up Writer2Latex, which would seem to handle the from part of the problem. I have no idea how well it will handle change bars. I haven't been able to find anything to handle the to part. Can someone provide me with pointers? In a pinch, they can read MSWord doc files in Writer. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Portability to Neo/Open/Star Office?
I've got a project that requires exchanging documents with others using StarOffice Writer (or one of it's children). Part of the requirement is to get change bars as the document moves back and forth. 1.4.0 apparently has change bar support - I haven't tried it yet. That's excellent, and I have no problem running CVS versions of software. Howver, getting the things to/from Writer format is another matter entirely. I've turned up Writer2Latex, which would seem to handle the from part of the problem. I have no idea how well it will handle change bars. I haven't been able to find anything to handle the to part. Can someone provide me with pointers? In a pinch, they can read MSWord doc files in Writer. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Portability to Neo/Open/Star Office?
I've got a project that requires exchanging documents with others using StarOffice Writer (or one of it's children). Part of the requirement is to get change bars as the document moves back and forth. 1.4.0 apparently has change bar support - I haven't tried it yet. That's excellent, and I have no problem running CVS versions of software. Howver, getting the things to/from Writer format is another matter entirely. I've turned up Writer2Latex, which would seem to handle the "from" part of the problem. I have no idea how well it will handle change bars. I haven't been able to find anything to handle the "to" part. Can someone provide me with pointers? In a pinch, they can read MSWord doc files in Writer. Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx/windows installation
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bo Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: * sh for the configure script. It would be nice to rewrite it in python, but nobody is brave enough to do it It is not terribly long (1600 lines) and most of the code are simple test/if/else that can be replaced by equivalent Python code. I am not saying that I can do the translation any time soon, but will you (lyx-devel) test and accept such a translated code once it is completed? Also, do you have any improvement in mind so that I can add it in? Which configure script are you talking about? There's one that builds the make files, etc. That's actually generated automatically by autoconf and automake and maybe others. See autogen.sh for details on how it gets built. Rewriting that configure script means the developers have to maintain the script, rather than the files used to generate it. That may not be met a net win. There's also lib/configure, which is used to build the preferences file from the environment. I have issues with that script, and wouldn't mind rewriting it. It's a hand-maintained shells script originally built with the autofoo commands. Replacing it with Python is probably a win. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx/windows installation
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Open file by extension is a very common practice under windows. Under linux/unix, we also only need to keep track of command names, not their pathes. BTW, it is very un-windows when someone has to set c:\progra~1\acrobat\reader\ to let lyx view pdf files. Bo Sure. The Windows way would be to define a viewer in lyxrc.defaults as \viewer pdf open $$i because the user will already have associated a .pdf extension with something like AcroRd32.exe. I thought the command on windows was start. Then again, I use windows only under great duress, and charge extra for it. The same thing works for OS X. It also works for Unix if you've got the open utility. With Unix and Mac OS X, open can be found on the path. Is the same true for Windows? Of course, that only deals with opening files for viewing. LyX also needs to deal with commands that convert files between types, like pdflatex, latex2html, dvipdf2m, gif2pdf, etc. The unix open will deal with this (well, the CVS version will). The OS X open won't. Will the Windows open? mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx/windows installation
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bo Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: * sh for the configure script. It would be nice to rewrite it in python, but nobody is brave enough to do it It is not terribly long (1600 lines) and most of the code are simple test/if/else that can be replaced by equivalent Python code. I am not saying that I can do the translation any time soon, but will you (lyx-devel) test and accept such a translated code once it is completed? Also, do you have any improvement in mind so that I can add it in? Which configure script are you talking about? There's one that builds the make files, etc. That's actually generated automatically by autoconf and automake and maybe others. See autogen.sh for details on how it gets built. Rewriting that configure script means the developers have to maintain the script, rather than the files used to generate it. That may not be met a net win. There's also lib/configure, which is used to build the preferences file from the environment. I have issues with that script, and wouldn't mind rewriting it. It's a hand-maintained shells script originally built with the autofoo commands. Replacing it with Python is probably a win. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx/windows installation
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: Open file by extension is a very common practice under windows. Under linux/unix, we also only need to keep track of command names, not their pathes. BTW, it is very un-windows when someone has to set c:\progra~1\acrobat\reader\ to let lyx view pdf files. Bo Sure. The Windows way would be to define a viewer in lyxrc.defaults as \viewer pdf open $$i because the user will already have associated a .pdf extension with something like AcroRd32.exe. I thought the command on windows was start. Then again, I use windows only under great duress, and charge extra for it. The same thing works for OS X. It also works for Unix if you've got the open utility. With Unix and Mac OS X, open can be found on the path. Is the same true for Windows? Of course, that only deals with opening files for viewing. LyX also needs to deal with commands that convert files between types, like pdflatex, latex2html, dvipdf2m, gif2pdf, etc. The unix open will deal with this (well, the CVS version will). The OS X open won't. Will the Windows open? mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx/windows installation
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > > * sh for the configure script. It would be nice to rewrite it in > > python, but nobody is brave enough to do it > It is not terribly long (1600 lines) and most of the code are simple > test/if/else that can > be replaced by equivalent Python code. I am not saying that I can do > the translation > any time soon, but will you (lyx-devel) test and accept such a > translated code once > it is completed? Also, do you have any improvement in mind so that I can add > it > in? Which configure script are you talking about? There's one that builds the make files, etc. That's actually generated automatically by autoconf and automake and maybe others. See autogen.sh for details on how it gets built. Rewriting that configure script means the developers have to maintain the script, rather than the files used to generate it. That may not be met a net win. There's also lib/configure, which is used to build the preferences file from the environment. I have issues with that script, and wouldn't mind rewriting it. It's a hand-maintained shells script originally built with the autofoo commands. Replacing it with Python is probably a win. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: lyx/windows installation
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > >> Open file by extension is a very common practice > >> under windows. Under linux/unix, we also only need to keep track of > >> command names, not their pathes. > > > > BTW, it is very un-windows when someone has to set > > c:\progra~1\acrobat\reader\ to let lyx view pdf files. > > > > Bo > > Sure. The Windows way would be to define a viewer in lyxrc.defaults as > > \viewer pdf "open $$i" > > because the user will already have associated a .pdf extension with > something like AcroRd32.exe. I thought the command on windows was "start". Then again, I use windows only under great duress, and charge extra for it. The same thing works for OS X. It also works for Unix if you've got the "open" utility. With Unix and Mac OS X, open can be found on the path. Is the same true for Windows? Of course, that only deals with opening files for viewing. LyX also needs to deal with commands that convert files between types, like pdflatex, latex2html, dvipdf2m, gif2pdf, etc. The unix open will deal with this (well, the CVS version will). The OS X open won't. Will the Windows open? http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Cannot get docbook on a mac
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Rolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: I am new to this forum, but have used lyx a little bit over a longish period of time. I now run on OS X tiger and installed the Tex bundle with fink (which appears to include a bunch of sgml/docbook stuff) and the Aqua version of lxy and everything seems to be working ... except that all the dockbook and sgml stuff is marked as unavailable. In addition none of the templates work. They all complain about a missing Tex class. So... I need some help here. What pieces am I missing? the configure script walks your $PATH looking for sgmltools and/or db2dvi to decide whether or not to configure docbook support. Fink probably put those in /sw/bin. If that's the case, you need to add /sw/bin the path used by LyX. On tiger (sorry, I'm a Mac newbie and haven't dealt with anything else) you edit ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist. There's a GUI plist editor available, but the file is just XML text, so you can use your favorite text editor on it as well. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Cannot get docbook on a mac
[Apologies to those of you who are seeing this twice.] In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: On Sep 13, 2005, at 10:03 AM, Mike Meyer wrote: the configure script walks your $PATH looking for sgmltools and/or db2dvi to decide whether or not to configure docbook support. Fink probably put those in /sw/bin. If that's the case, you need to add /sw/bin the path used by LyX. On tiger (sorry, I'm a Mac newbie and haven't dealt with anything else) you edit ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist. There's a GUI plist editor available, but the file is just XML text, so you can use your favorite text editor on it as well. Actually, if all you want is to add /sw/bin to the path that LyX uses, you should do it from within LyX itself: LyX Preferences PATH PATH Prefix. (For LyX/Mac-1.3.6, the default settings already have /sw/bin there.) If you add something to the PATH setting in ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist, that will apply to *every* OS X application, which is probably overkill and potentially a security risk. Whether or not it's overkill depends on how many applications you have that want to use programs from fink (or, in my case, darwinports). I have a couple, so doing things this way is easier for me. I found this method while trying to figure out why LyX wasn't finding my darwinports software. That I didn't find the LyX Preferences PATH PATH Prefix methods suggests a doc bug. This appears to be a Mac issue - I don't find the PATH entries in preferences in 1.3.5 on my Unix box. Might just be my not having taken time to read the docs properly, though. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Command Control
I use LyX on both Unix and the Mac. The Mac version does a marvelous job of looking like a Mac application (at least to my not-very-mac-enabled-eyes), but it does so by mapping the control key bindings to the command key. This means I can't use the non-Mac bindings - especially the emacs bindings - an get the behavior I want. This means it's a pain for me to move back and forth between the two. Can someone suggest a way to make the control key in MacLyX be the control key, instead of the command key? Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Command Control
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: On Sep 13, 2005, at 5:31 PM, Mike Meyer wrote: I use LyX on both Unix and the Mac. The Mac version does a marvelous job of looking like a Mac application (at least to my not-very-mac-enabled-eyes), but it does so by mapping the control key bindings to the command key. This means I can't use the non-Mac bindings - especially the emacs bindings - an get the behavior I want. This means it's a pain for me to move back and forth between the two. Can someone suggest a way to make the control key in MacLyX be the control key, instead of the command key? I believe it's a Qt/Mac issue: only Command and Option are available for key bindings. (If I recall, it's possible to patch Qt to substitute Control for one of these, but I think it's a substitution rather than an addition. Can anyone correct me on this?) It's definitely a substitution. If I use one of the other bindings, Command-Key does what I expect Control-Key to do, and Control-Key does nothing. If it had been an addition, I probably would have never noticed. Anyone got a pointer to the patch? Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Cannot get docbook on a mac
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Rolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: I am new to this forum, but have used lyx a little bit over a longish period of time. I now run on OS X tiger and installed the Tex bundle with fink (which appears to include a bunch of sgml/docbook stuff) and the Aqua version of lxy and everything seems to be working ... except that all the dockbook and sgml stuff is marked as unavailable. In addition none of the templates work. They all complain about a missing Tex class. So... I need some help here. What pieces am I missing? the configure script walks your $PATH looking for sgmltools and/or db2dvi to decide whether or not to configure docbook support. Fink probably put those in /sw/bin. If that's the case, you need to add /sw/bin the path used by LyX. On tiger (sorry, I'm a Mac newbie and haven't dealt with anything else) you edit ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist. There's a GUI plist editor available, but the file is just XML text, so you can use your favorite text editor on it as well. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Cannot get docbook on a mac
[Apologies to those of you who are seeing this twice.] In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: On Sep 13, 2005, at 10:03 AM, Mike Meyer wrote: the configure script walks your $PATH looking for sgmltools and/or db2dvi to decide whether or not to configure docbook support. Fink probably put those in /sw/bin. If that's the case, you need to add /sw/bin the path used by LyX. On tiger (sorry, I'm a Mac newbie and haven't dealt with anything else) you edit ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist. There's a GUI plist editor available, but the file is just XML text, so you can use your favorite text editor on it as well. Actually, if all you want is to add /sw/bin to the path that LyX uses, you should do it from within LyX itself: LyX Preferences PATH PATH Prefix. (For LyX/Mac-1.3.6, the default settings already have /sw/bin there.) If you add something to the PATH setting in ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist, that will apply to *every* OS X application, which is probably overkill and potentially a security risk. Whether or not it's overkill depends on how many applications you have that want to use programs from fink (or, in my case, darwinports). I have a couple, so doing things this way is easier for me. I found this method while trying to figure out why LyX wasn't finding my darwinports software. That I didn't find the LyX Preferences PATH PATH Prefix methods suggests a doc bug. This appears to be a Mac issue - I don't find the PATH entries in preferences in 1.3.5 on my Unix box. Might just be my not having taken time to read the docs properly, though. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Command Control
I use LyX on both Unix and the Mac. The Mac version does a marvelous job of looking like a Mac application (at least to my not-very-mac-enabled-eyes), but it does so by mapping the control key bindings to the command key. This means I can't use the non-Mac bindings - especially the emacs bindings - an get the behavior I want. This means it's a pain for me to move back and forth between the two. Can someone suggest a way to make the control key in MacLyX be the control key, instead of the command key? Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Command Control
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bennett Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: On Sep 13, 2005, at 5:31 PM, Mike Meyer wrote: I use LyX on both Unix and the Mac. The Mac version does a marvelous job of looking like a Mac application (at least to my not-very-mac-enabled-eyes), but it does so by mapping the control key bindings to the command key. This means I can't use the non-Mac bindings - especially the emacs bindings - an get the behavior I want. This means it's a pain for me to move back and forth between the two. Can someone suggest a way to make the control key in MacLyX be the control key, instead of the command key? I believe it's a Qt/Mac issue: only Command and Option are available for key bindings. (If I recall, it's possible to patch Qt to substitute Control for one of these, but I think it's a substitution rather than an addition. Can anyone correct me on this?) It's definitely a substitution. If I use one of the other bindings, Command-Key does what I expect Control-Key to do, and Control-Key does nothing. If it had been an addition, I probably would have never noticed. Anyone got a pointer to the patch? Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Cannot get docbook on a mac
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Rolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > I am new to this forum, but have used lyx a little bit over a > longish period of time. I now run on OS X tiger and installed the > Tex bundle with fink (which appears to include a bunch of > sgml/docbook stuff) and the Aqua version of lxy and everything seems > to be working ... except that all the dockbook and sgml stuff is > marked as unavailable. In addition none of the templates work. They > all complain about a missing Tex class. So... I need some help > here. What pieces am I missing? the configure script walks your $PATH looking for sgmltools and/or db2dvi to decide whether or not to configure docbook support. Fink probably put those in /sw/bin. If that's the case, you need to add /sw/bin the path used by LyX. On tiger (sorry, I'm a Mac newbie and haven't dealt with anything else) you edit ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist. There's a GUI plist editor available, but the file is just XML text, so you can use your favorite text editor on it as well. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Cannot get docbook on a mac
[Apologies to those of you who are seeing this twice.] In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > On Sep 13, 2005, at 10:03 AM, Mike Meyer wrote: > > the configure script walks your $PATH looking for sgmltools and/or > > db2dvi to decide whether or not to configure docbook support. Fink > > probably put those in /sw/bin. > > If that's the case, you need to add /sw/bin the path used by LyX. On > > tiger (sorry, I'm a Mac newbie and haven't dealt with anything else) > > you edit ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist. There's a GUI plist editor > > available, but the file is just XML text, so you can use your favorite > > text editor on it as well. > Actually, if all you want is to add /sw/bin to the path that LyX > uses, you should do it from within LyX itself: LyX > Preferences > > PATH > PATH Prefix. (For LyX/Mac-1.3.6, the default settings already > have /sw/bin there.) If you add something to the PATH setting in > ~/.MacOSX/environment.plist, that will apply to *every* OS X > application, which is probably overkill and potentially a security risk. Whether or not it's overkill depends on how many applications you have that want to use programs from fink (or, in my case, darwinports). I have a couple, so doing things this way is easier for me. I found this method while trying to figure out why LyX wasn't finding my darwinports software. That I didn't find the LyX > Preferences > PATH > PATH Prefix methods suggests a doc bug. This appears to be a Mac issue - I don't find the PATH entries in preferences in 1.3.5 on my Unix box. Might just be my not having taken time to read the docs properly, though. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Command Control
I use LyX on both Unix and the Mac. The Mac version does a marvelous job of looking like a Mac application (at least to my not-very-mac-enabled-eyes), but it does so by mapping the control key bindings to the command key. This means I can't use the non-Mac bindings - especially the emacs bindings - an get the behavior I want. This means it's a pain for me to move back and forth between the two. Can someone suggest a way to make the control key in MacLyX be the control key, instead of the command key? Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Command Control
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bennett Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > On Sep 13, 2005, at 5:31 PM, Mike Meyer wrote: > > I use LyX on both Unix and the Mac. The Mac version does a marvelous > > job of looking like a Mac application (at least to my > > not-very-mac-enabled-eyes), but it does so by mapping the control key > > bindings to the command key. This means I can't use the non-Mac > > bindings - especially the emacs bindings - an get the behavior I > > want. This means it's a pain for me to move back and forth between the > > two. > > Can someone suggest a way to make the control key in MacLyX be the > > control key, instead of the command key? > I believe it's a Qt/Mac issue: only and are > available for key bindings. (If I recall, it's possible to patch Qt > to substitute for one of these, but I think it's a > substitution rather than an addition. Can anyone correct me on this?) It's definitely a substitution. If I use one of the other bindings, Command-Key does what I expect Control-Key to do, and Control-Key does nothing. If it had been an addition, I probably would have never noticed. Anyone got a pointer to the patch? Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Simple questions.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roy Schestowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: _/ On Fri 09 Sep 2005 22:14:14 BST, [Mike Meyer] wrote : \_ Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Primary-Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-face: 5Mnwy%?jIIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`(,SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1RG% *h+%X^n0EZdTM8_IB;a8F?(Fblw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ --text follows this line-- 1) Has anyone done a layout file for unixman.sty? Google didn't turn one up, nor did google turn up an archive of LyX layout files. I have not come across it. Do you strictly need that specific style? It is usually easy to manipulate existing ones to suit your requirements. Well, it does the things I want. I'm still learning what will be required to get this working, and may wind up doing what you suggest in this case. I was hoping somene had already done it. 2) I know this has to have been discussed to death - probably repeatedly - but I couldn't seem to find the right query to tickle google or the list archives into kicking it up. Could someone provide a pointer to a rational for going with a single window instead of the far more common multiple window approach? Or even tabs? I think I am following your point here. It is just slightly hard-to-follow, which must be the reason no (constructive) replies have yet been sent. Sorry about that. What I mean is that most applications let you open multiple windows for editing puproses, with each window usually restricted to a specific file. So when you open multiple documents, you get a window per document, and a menu of windows. With LyX, you get one window, and a menu of Documents. You change between documents in that window. This drove me batty while working through the documentation - I wanted one window on the documentation I was reading, and another on a document I was using as a sandbox. I eventually solved that one by exporting the documentation as PDF, and reading *that*. I still get bit every once and a while. I'll ask How do I do X, hit the Help menu, find what I want, then proceed to do X to the documentation. I think mostly it's a matter of what I'm used to, and was wondering why it was done this way. Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] provided an answer to my question: dealing with mutliple views into the same document requires major restructuring of the code. This is planned for 1.5 (or later). I'd be happy if each document was restricted to a single window, but what the hey - if I really want it, I have the source code. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Simple questions.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roy Schestowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: What I mean is that most applications let you open multiple windows for editing puproses, with each window usually restricted to a specific file. So when you open multiple documents, you get a window per document, and a menu of windows. With LyX, you get one window, and a menu of Documents... I don't consider that to be a bad thing. I dislike window clutter a la Word. What I mentioned earlier is what bothered me more: too many children windows. Yeah, I could see getting used to this behavior. I set things in Emacs to not open new windows when you open new documents. I was just curious as to why LyX did things this way, rather than the more conventional way. Instantiate another instance of LyX. Although LyX is singleton as far as I can tell, you can launch (using your Python-based Open?) a second terminal and call LyX from that. Unfortunately, I was working on a Mac, using the Mac version of LyX. If you can have two copies of LyX running, I haven't figured out how. Trying to launch LyX a second time just pops up the window for the running copy. Opening a second .lyx file causes the running LyX to try and open it. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Simple questions.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roy Schestowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: _/ On Fri 09 Sep 2005 22:14:14 BST, [Mike Meyer] wrote : \_ Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Primary-Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-face: 5Mnwy%?jIIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`(,SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1RG% *h+%X^n0EZdTM8_IB;a8F?(Fblw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ --text follows this line-- 1) Has anyone done a layout file for unixman.sty? Google didn't turn one up, nor did google turn up an archive of LyX layout files. I have not come across it. Do you strictly need that specific style? It is usually easy to manipulate existing ones to suit your requirements. Well, it does the things I want. I'm still learning what will be required to get this working, and may wind up doing what you suggest in this case. I was hoping somene had already done it. 2) I know this has to have been discussed to death - probably repeatedly - but I couldn't seem to find the right query to tickle google or the list archives into kicking it up. Could someone provide a pointer to a rational for going with a single window instead of the far more common multiple window approach? Or even tabs? I think I am following your point here. It is just slightly hard-to-follow, which must be the reason no (constructive) replies have yet been sent. Sorry about that. What I mean is that most applications let you open multiple windows for editing puproses, with each window usually restricted to a specific file. So when you open multiple documents, you get a window per document, and a menu of windows. With LyX, you get one window, and a menu of Documents. You change between documents in that window. This drove me batty while working through the documentation - I wanted one window on the documentation I was reading, and another on a document I was using as a sandbox. I eventually solved that one by exporting the documentation as PDF, and reading *that*. I still get bit every once and a while. I'll ask How do I do X, hit the Help menu, find what I want, then proceed to do X to the documentation. I think mostly it's a matter of what I'm used to, and was wondering why it was done this way. Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] provided an answer to my question: dealing with mutliple views into the same document requires major restructuring of the code. This is planned for 1.5 (or later). I'd be happy if each document was restricted to a single window, but what the hey - if I really want it, I have the source code. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Simple questions.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roy Schestowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: What I mean is that most applications let you open multiple windows for editing puproses, with each window usually restricted to a specific file. So when you open multiple documents, you get a window per document, and a menu of windows. With LyX, you get one window, and a menu of Documents... I don't consider that to be a bad thing. I dislike window clutter a la Word. What I mentioned earlier is what bothered me more: too many children windows. Yeah, I could see getting used to this behavior. I set things in Emacs to not open new windows when you open new documents. I was just curious as to why LyX did things this way, rather than the more conventional way. Instantiate another instance of LyX. Although LyX is singleton as far as I can tell, you can launch (using your Python-based Open?) a second terminal and call LyX from that. Unfortunately, I was working on a Mac, using the Mac version of LyX. If you can have two copies of LyX running, I haven't figured out how. Trying to launch LyX a second time just pops up the window for the running copy. Opening a second .lyx file causes the running LyX to try and open it. Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Simple questions.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roy Schestowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > _/ On Fri 09 Sep 2005 22:14:14 BST, [Mike Meyer] wrote : \_ > > > Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > X-Primary-Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > X-face: > > "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% > > *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ > > --text follows this line-- > > 1) Has anyone done a layout file for unixman.sty? Google didn't turn > > one up, nor did google turn up an archive of LyX layout files. > I have not come across it. Do you strictly need that specific style? It is > usually easy to manipulate existing ones to suit your requirements. Well, it does the things I want. I'm still learning what will be required to get this working, and may wind up doing what you suggest in this case. I was hoping somene had already done it. > > 2) I know this has to have been discussed to death - probably > > repeatedly - but I couldn't seem to find the right query to tickle > > google or the list archives into kicking it up. Could someone > > provide a pointer to a rational for going with a single window > > instead of the far more common multiple window approach? Or even tabs? > I think I am following your point here. It is just slightly hard-to-follow, > which must be the reason no (constructive) replies have yet been sent. Sorry about that. What I mean is that most applications let you open multiple windows for "editing" puproses, with each window usually restricted to a specific file. So when you open multiple documents, you get a window per document, and a menu of windows. With LyX, you get one window, and a menu of Documents. You change between documents in that window. This drove me batty while working through the documentation - I wanted one window on the documentation I was reading, and another on a document I was using as a sandbox. I eventually solved that one by exporting the documentation as PDF, and reading *that*. I still get bit every once and a while. I'll ask "How do I do X", hit the Help menu, find what I want, then proceed to "do X" to the documentation. I think mostly it's a matter of "what I'm used to", and was wondering why it was done this way. Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> provided an answer to my question: dealing with mutliple views into the same document requires major restructuring of the code. This is planned for 1.5 (or later). I'd be happy if each document was restricted to a single window, but what the hey - if I really want it, I have the source code. Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: Simple questions.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roy Schestowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > > What I mean is that most applications let you open multiple windows > > for "editing" puproses, with each window usually restricted to a > > specific file. So when you open multiple documents, you get a window > > per document, and a menu of windows. With LyX, you get one window, and > > a menu of Documents... > I don't consider that to be a bad thing. I dislike window clutter a la Word. > What I mentioned earlier is what bothered me more: too many children windows. Yeah, I could see getting used to this behavior. I set things in Emacs to not open new windows when you open new documents. I was just curious as to why LyX did things this way, rather than the more conventional way. > Instantiate another instance of LyX. Although LyX is singleton as > far as I can tell, you can launch (using your Python-based Open?) a > second terminal and call LyX from that. Unfortunately, I was working on a Mac, using the Mac version of LyX. If you can have two copies of LyX running, I haven't figured out how. Trying to launch LyX a second time just pops up the window for the running copy. Opening a second .lyx file causes the running LyX to try and open it. Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
open for Unix.
Based on discussion regarding the configuration process on lyx-devel, I started working on a generic file opener for Unix, ala open on OS X and start on Windows. A first release is ready. I've tested it on a number of different things, including using it to launch all my viewers from LyX. You can get it from URL: http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.1.tgz . I'd appreciate comments and feedback. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: open for Unix.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roy Schestowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: _/ On Sun 11 Sep 2005 01:14:55 BST, [Mike Meyer] wrote : \_ Based on discussion regarding the configuration process on lyx-devel, I started working on a generic file opener for Unix, ala open on OS X and start on Windows. A first release is ready. I've tested it on a number of different things, including using it to launch all my viewers from LyX. You can get it from URL: http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.1.tgz . I'd appreciate comments and feedback. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. I beg you to pardon my ignorance, but what should I, as a LyX end-user, be doing with the Python file? Don't get me wrong, I think it is a wonderful contribution. Is that aimed primarily at developers, for inclusion in future releases of LyX perhaps? I admit that LyX-users is a strange place for this to show up. Issues with the configuration script came up on the -devel list, and one suggestion was that LyX shouldn't have to worry about this. I agreed - and this is what resulted. I'm going to try and get it bundled as part of LyX, or at least get LyX to take advantage of open if it's present. Since supporting LyX is a priority, I specifically wanted LyX users as part of the test group. Hence the announcement there. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Desktop/open-0.1 python open.py Traceback (most recent call last): File open.py, line 19, in ? from subprocess import Popen ImportError: No module named subprocess My instructions didn't include enough information about this. You need Python 2.4. The subprocess module was introduced in that. I can rewrite the code using pre-2.4 tools if this causes enough people problems. Perhaps I should look at the instructions you wrote more carefully. I will do so shortly, as a matter fact. The archive is apparently badly structured, with 2 directories called open-0.1 at the top level (maybe a bug which is at /my/ end?) and two ./CVS in each. I think that may be on your end. I certainly don't see those on my end. Including the CVS directory was a mistake - I'm used to better tools :-(. Thank you for the feedback, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
open for Unix.
Based on discussion regarding the configuration process on lyx-devel, I started working on a generic file opener for Unix, ala open on OS X and start on Windows. A first release is ready. I've tested it on a number of different things, including using it to launch all my viewers from LyX. You can get it from URL: http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.1.tgz . I'd appreciate comments and feedback. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: open for Unix.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roy Schestowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: _/ On Sun 11 Sep 2005 01:14:55 BST, [Mike Meyer] wrote : \_ Based on discussion regarding the configuration process on lyx-devel, I started working on a generic file opener for Unix, ala open on OS X and start on Windows. A first release is ready. I've tested it on a number of different things, including using it to launch all my viewers from LyX. You can get it from URL: http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.1.tgz . I'd appreciate comments and feedback. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. I beg you to pardon my ignorance, but what should I, as a LyX end-user, be doing with the Python file? Don't get me wrong, I think it is a wonderful contribution. Is that aimed primarily at developers, for inclusion in future releases of LyX perhaps? I admit that LyX-users is a strange place for this to show up. Issues with the configuration script came up on the -devel list, and one suggestion was that LyX shouldn't have to worry about this. I agreed - and this is what resulted. I'm going to try and get it bundled as part of LyX, or at least get LyX to take advantage of open if it's present. Since supporting LyX is a priority, I specifically wanted LyX users as part of the test group. Hence the announcement there. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Desktop/open-0.1 python open.py Traceback (most recent call last): File open.py, line 19, in ? from subprocess import Popen ImportError: No module named subprocess My instructions didn't include enough information about this. You need Python 2.4. The subprocess module was introduced in that. I can rewrite the code using pre-2.4 tools if this causes enough people problems. Perhaps I should look at the instructions you wrote more carefully. I will do so shortly, as a matter fact. The archive is apparently badly structured, with 2 directories called open-0.1 at the top level (maybe a bug which is at /my/ end?) and two ./CVS in each. I think that may be on your end. I certainly don't see those on my end. Including the CVS directory was a mistake - I'm used to better tools :-(. Thank you for the feedback, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
"open" for Unix.
Based on discussion regarding the configuration process on lyx-devel, I started working on a generic "file opener" for Unix, ala "open" on OS X and "start" on Windows. A first release is ready. I've tested it on a number of different things, including using it to launch all my viewers from LyX. You can get it from http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.1.tgz >. I'd appreciate comments and feedback. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: "open" for Unix.
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roy Schestowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > _/ On Sun 11 Sep 2005 01:14:55 BST, [Mike Meyer] wrote : \_ > > > Based on discussion regarding the configuration process on lyx-devel, > > I started working on a generic "file opener" for Unix, ala "open" on > > OS X and "start" on Windows. A first release is ready. I've tested it > > on a number of different things, including using it to launch all my > > viewers from LyX. > > > > You can get it from http://www.mired.org/downloads/open-0.1.tgz > >> . I'd appreciate comments and feedback. > > > > > -- > > Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > http://www.mired.org/consulting.html > > Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. > > I beg you to pardon my ignorance, but what should I, as a LyX end-user, > be doing > with the Python file? Don't get me wrong, I think it is a wonderful > contribution. Is that aimed primarily at developers, for inclusion in future > releases of LyX perhaps? I admit that LyX-users is a strange place for this to show up. Issues with the configuration script came up on the -devel list, and one suggestion was that "LyX shouldn't have to worry about this." I agreed - and this is what resulted. I'm going to try and get it bundled as part of LyX, or at least get LyX to take advantage of open if it's present. Since supporting LyX is a priority, I specifically wanted LyX users as part of the test group. Hence the announcement there. > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Desktop/open-0.1> python open.py > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "open.py", line 19, in ? > from subprocess import Popen > ImportError: No module named subprocess My instructions didn't include enough information about this. You need Python 2.4. The subprocess module was introduced in that. I can rewrite the code using pre-2.4 tools if this causes enough people problems. > Perhaps I should look at the instructions you wrote more carefully. I > will do so > shortly, as a matter fact. The archive is apparently badly structured, with 2 > directories called open-0.1 at the top level (maybe a bug which is at /my/ > end?) and two ./CVS in each. I think that may be on your end. I certainly don't see those on my end. Including the CVS directory was a mistake - I'm used to better tools :-(. Thank you for the feedback, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Simple questions.
Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Primary-Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-face: 5Mnwy%?jIIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`(,SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1RG% *h+%X^n0EZdTM8_IB;a8F?(Fblw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ --text follows this line-- 1) Has anyone done a layout file for unixman.sty? Google didn't turn one up, nor did google turn up an archive of LyX layout files. 2) I know this has to have been discussed to death - probably repeatedly - but I couldn't seem to find the right query to tickle google or the list archives into kicking it up. Could someone provide a pointer to a rational for going with a single window instead of the far more common multiple window approach? Or even tabs? Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Simple questions.
Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Primary-Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-face: 5Mnwy%?jIIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`(,SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1RG% *h+%X^n0EZdTM8_IB;a8F?(Fblw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ --text follows this line-- 1) Has anyone done a layout file for unixman.sty? Google didn't turn one up, nor did google turn up an archive of LyX layout files. 2) I know this has to have been discussed to death - probably repeatedly - but I couldn't seem to find the right query to tickle google or the list archives into kicking it up. Could someone provide a pointer to a rational for going with a single window instead of the far more common multiple window approach? Or even tabs? Thanks, mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Simple questions.
Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Primary-Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ --text follows this line-- 1) Has anyone done a layout file for unixman.sty? Google didn't turn one up, nor did google turn up an archive of LyX layout files. 2) I know this has to have been discussed to death - probably repeatedly - but I couldn't seem to find the right query to tickle google or the list archives into kicking it up. Could someone provide a pointer to a rational for going with a single window instead of the far more common multiple window approach? Or even tabs? Thanks, http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Re: fonts.alias / fonts.scale
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], /* jsha */ [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: I've got a directory filled with Type1 fonts (.afm, .inf, .pfa, .pfb and .pfm accompanying each font release) which I'm trying to install on X11. However, in order to make mkfontdir work I seem to need a fonts.alias and/or fonts.scale in advance. See URL: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/fonts/x141.html for instructions on adding fonts to fonts.dir and fonts.scale. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.
Re: fonts.alias / fonts.scale
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], /* jsha */ [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed: I've got a directory filled with Type1 fonts (.afm, .inf, .pfa, .pfb and .pfm accompanying each font release) which I'm trying to install on X11. However, in order to make mkfontdir work I seem to need a fonts.alias and/or fonts.scale in advance. See URL: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/fonts/x141.html for instructions on adding fonts to fonts.dir and fonts.scale. mike -- Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.
Re: fonts.alias / fonts.scale
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, /* jsha */ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed: > I've got a directory filled with Type1 fonts (.afm, .inf, .pfa, .pfb and .pfm > accompanying each font release) which I'm trying to install on X11. However, > in order to make mkfontdir work I seem to need a fonts.alias and/or fonts.scale > in advance. See http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/fonts/x141.html > for instructions on adding fonts to fonts.dir and fonts.scale. http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.
