Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: In contrast, the way you describe it, it sounds wonderful: Skip the manual pdf-graphics-creation and just have lyx/imagemagick create the necessary png's on the fly. Just need one .eps (like in the old days...). That is/would be great! It is like that also in 1.3, but: Unfortunately both in 1.3 and 1.4 the output type for pdflatex for automatic conversion is hardcoded to png. This is fine for bitmap images, but not for vector graphics. This problem has been discussed several times before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to now nobody came up with such a beast. I meant: which wiki page should it be added to? I don't know. Put it where you think it fits, if it turns out that there is a better place people will move it. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg == Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Georg This problem has been discussed several times Georg before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine Georg wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to Georg now nobody came up with such a beast. I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each converter that tells how lossy conversion is. JMarc
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Georg Baum wrote: I meant: which wiki page should it be added to? I don't know. Put it where you think it fits, if it turns out that there is a better place people will move it. If you create a new wiki page (anybody is welcome to do that) then please remember to edit the 'PageList'-page and add a link to the new page. /Christian -- Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Georg == Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Georg This problem has been discussed several times Georg before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine Georg wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to Georg now nobody came up with such a beast. Good point about the bitmap thing, I'm definitely a vector fan. After looking a little at the devel mailing archives to get an idea of the discussion: I may be wrong, but could it be that people wrongly equate pdf=vector? AFAIK, pdf can hold both types of graphics, and e.g. imagemagick can produce pdfs, but *only* with bitmaps (last time I checked, or am I wrong here?). To my knowledge the only vector ways to go eps-pdf is ghostscript or acrobat. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong. But maybe for output the bitmaps are not so bad as they seem at first. Most scholarly writing (the target group of lyx) is meant for something like 600dpi laser printer resolution, even if you never really print it out. You can convert your pngs in a way that looks good there. I mean for the same reason pngs mostly work well on the web, and many lyx users probably never noticed that it was being converted (?). See also my user option suggestion below. I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each converter that tells how lossy conversion is. Without any offense: As a user I would like to have control and not rely on some hidden fuzzy-logic algorithm. Why not an option in preferences-lookfeel-graphics? This preference pane is almost empty now. What about something like a tick box Warn when converting vector graphics to bitmap, and secondly an editable field approx. target resolution for bitmapped images if necessary. A completely different path of course would be to count on ghostscript, but maybe lyx shouldn't depend on that. Anyway, just my suggestions, no urgent need on my side (remember I just found out about the auto-conversion for pdflatex yesterday!) -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: Good point about the bitmap thing, I'm definitely a vector fan. After looking a little at the devel mailing archives to get an idea of the discussion: I may be wrong, but could it be that people wrongly equate pdf=vector? No, at least I can't remember people doing that. AFAIK, pdf can hold both types of graphics, and e.g. Yes. imagemagick can produce pdfs, but *only* with bitmaps (last time I checked, or am I wrong here?). To my knowledge the only vector ways to go eps-pdf is ghostscript or acrobat. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong. And this is the problem: Since converters are user definable, we don't know wether a given eps - pdf conversion retains vector data or not. But maybe for output the bitmaps are not so bad as they seem at first. True, but the optimal solution that should be implemented some day would be to retain vector data. I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each converter that tells how lossy conversion is. Without any offense: As a user I would like to have control and not rely on some hidden fuzzy-logic algorithm. Why not an option in This is no fuzzy logic, and in order to be usable it would need to be documented. You have complete control over your converters, of course you would also be able to adjust the cost factor. I think it is indeed a useful approach. preferences-lookfeel-graphics? This preference pane is almost empty now. What about something like a tick box Warn when converting vector graphics to bitmap, and secondly an editable field approx. target resolution for bitmapped images if necessary. The problem is: We don't know always wether a given file contains vector or bitmap data. So we can't issue that warning. A completely different path of course would be to count on ghostscript, but maybe lyx shouldn't depend on that. Anyway, just my suggestions, no urgent need on my side (remember I just found out about the auto-conversion for pdflatex yesterday!) LyX depends heavily on ghostscript (at least in the default configuration). But again, this is configurable. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote: And this is the problem: Since converters are user definable, we don't know wether a given eps - pdf conversion retains vector data or not. Ok, now (I think) I understand. True, but the optimal solution that should be implemented some day would be to retain vector data. But this seems to clash with user-definable converters, doesn't it? It almost seems like incompatible design choices: user-choices vs. automatic-good-choices-by-prgoram. No single one is superior per se, but should be followed consistently. This is no fuzzy logic, and in order to be usable it would need to be documented. You have complete control over your converters, of course you would also be able to adjust the cost factor. I think it is indeed a useful approach. I apologize, I didn't understand it properly before. Yes this would be very flexible. Maybe a little simpler would be to have priority rankings for each source format in a couple of drop-down lists. (The graphics preference pane is really empty...;-) ) Of course the user would need to be aware that the output also depends on her converter configuration. ok, have bothered you long enough, take care -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: In contrast, the way you describe it, it sounds wonderful: Skip the manual pdf-graphics-creation and just have lyx/imagemagick create the necessary png's on the fly. Just need one .eps (like in the old days...). That is/would be great! It is like that also in 1.3, but: Unfortunately both in 1.3 and 1.4 the output type for pdflatex for automatic conversion is hardcoded to png. This is fine for bitmap images, but not for vector graphics. This problem has been discussed several times before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to now nobody came up with such a beast. I meant: which wiki page should it be added to? I don't know. Put it where you think it fits, if it turns out that there is a better place people will move it. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg == Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Georg This problem has been discussed several times Georg before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine Georg wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to Georg now nobody came up with such a beast. I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each converter that tells how lossy conversion is. JMarc
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Georg Baum wrote: I meant: which wiki page should it be added to? I don't know. Put it where you think it fits, if it turns out that there is a better place people will move it. If you create a new wiki page (anybody is welcome to do that) then please remember to edit the 'PageList'-page and add a link to the new page. /Christian -- Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Georg == Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Georg This problem has been discussed several times Georg before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine Georg wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to Georg now nobody came up with such a beast. Good point about the bitmap thing, I'm definitely a vector fan. After looking a little at the devel mailing archives to get an idea of the discussion: I may be wrong, but could it be that people wrongly equate pdf=vector? AFAIK, pdf can hold both types of graphics, and e.g. imagemagick can produce pdfs, but *only* with bitmaps (last time I checked, or am I wrong here?). To my knowledge the only vector ways to go eps-pdf is ghostscript or acrobat. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong. But maybe for output the bitmaps are not so bad as they seem at first. Most scholarly writing (the target group of lyx) is meant for something like 600dpi laser printer resolution, even if you never really print it out. You can convert your pngs in a way that looks good there. I mean for the same reason pngs mostly work well on the web, and many lyx users probably never noticed that it was being converted (?). See also my user option suggestion below. I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each converter that tells how lossy conversion is. Without any offense: As a user I would like to have control and not rely on some hidden fuzzy-logic algorithm. Why not an option in preferences-lookfeel-graphics? This preference pane is almost empty now. What about something like a tick box Warn when converting vector graphics to bitmap, and secondly an editable field approx. target resolution for bitmapped images if necessary. A completely different path of course would be to count on ghostscript, but maybe lyx shouldn't depend on that. Anyway, just my suggestions, no urgent need on my side (remember I just found out about the auto-conversion for pdflatex yesterday!) -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: Good point about the bitmap thing, I'm definitely a vector fan. After looking a little at the devel mailing archives to get an idea of the discussion: I may be wrong, but could it be that people wrongly equate pdf=vector? No, at least I can't remember people doing that. AFAIK, pdf can hold both types of graphics, and e.g. Yes. imagemagick can produce pdfs, but *only* with bitmaps (last time I checked, or am I wrong here?). To my knowledge the only vector ways to go eps-pdf is ghostscript or acrobat. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong. And this is the problem: Since converters are user definable, we don't know wether a given eps - pdf conversion retains vector data or not. But maybe for output the bitmaps are not so bad as they seem at first. True, but the optimal solution that should be implemented some day would be to retain vector data. I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each converter that tells how lossy conversion is. Without any offense: As a user I would like to have control and not rely on some hidden fuzzy-logic algorithm. Why not an option in This is no fuzzy logic, and in order to be usable it would need to be documented. You have complete control over your converters, of course you would also be able to adjust the cost factor. I think it is indeed a useful approach. preferences-lookfeel-graphics? This preference pane is almost empty now. What about something like a tick box Warn when converting vector graphics to bitmap, and secondly an editable field approx. target resolution for bitmapped images if necessary. The problem is: We don't know always wether a given file contains vector or bitmap data. So we can't issue that warning. A completely different path of course would be to count on ghostscript, but maybe lyx shouldn't depend on that. Anyway, just my suggestions, no urgent need on my side (remember I just found out about the auto-conversion for pdflatex yesterday!) LyX depends heavily on ghostscript (at least in the default configuration). But again, this is configurable. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote: And this is the problem: Since converters are user definable, we don't know wether a given eps - pdf conversion retains vector data or not. Ok, now (I think) I understand. True, but the optimal solution that should be implemented some day would be to retain vector data. But this seems to clash with user-definable converters, doesn't it? It almost seems like incompatible design choices: user-choices vs. automatic-good-choices-by-prgoram. No single one is superior per se, but should be followed consistently. This is no fuzzy logic, and in order to be usable it would need to be documented. You have complete control over your converters, of course you would also be able to adjust the cost factor. I think it is indeed a useful approach. I apologize, I didn't understand it properly before. Yes this would be very flexible. Maybe a little simpler would be to have priority rankings for each source format in a couple of drop-down lists. (The graphics preference pane is really empty...;-) ) Of course the user would need to be aware that the output also depends on her converter configuration. ok, have bothered you long enough, take care -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: > In contrast, the way you describe it, it sounds wonderful: Skip the > manual pdf-graphics-creation and just have lyx/imagemagick create the > necessary png's on the fly. Just need one .eps (like in the old > days...). That is/would be great! It is like that also in 1.3, but: Unfortunately both in 1.3 and 1.4 the output type for pdflatex for automatic conversion is hardcoded to png. This is fine for bitmap images, but not for vector graphics. This problem has been discussed several times before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to now nobody came up with such a beast. > I meant: which wiki page should it be added to? I don't know. Put it where you think it fits, if it turns out that there is a better place people will move it. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
> "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Georg> This problem has been discussed several times Georg> before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine Georg> wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to Georg> now nobody came up with such a beast. I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each converter that tells how lossy conversion is. JMarc
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Georg Baum wrote: > > I meant: which wiki page should it be added to? > > I don't know. Put it where you think it fits, if it turns out that there is > a better place people will move it. If you create a new wiki page (anybody is welcome to do that) then please remember to edit the 'PageList'-page and add a link to the new page. /Christian -- Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Georg> This problem has been discussed several times Georg> before, but to solve it we would need an algorithm to determine Georg> wether to convert to png or pdf from a given format, and up to Georg> now nobody came up with such a beast. Good point about the bitmap thing, I'm definitely a vector fan. After looking a little at the devel mailing archives to get an idea of the discussion: I may be wrong, but could it be that people wrongly equate pdf=vector? AFAIK, pdf can hold both types of graphics, and e.g. imagemagick can produce pdfs, but *only* with bitmaps (last time I checked, or am I wrong here?). To my knowledge the only vector ways to go eps->pdf is ghostscript or acrobat. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong. But maybe for output the bitmaps are not so bad as they seem at first. Most scholarly writing (the target group of lyx) is meant for something like 600dpi laser printer resolution, even if you never really print it out. You can convert your pngs in a way that looks good there. I mean for the same reason pngs mostly work well on the web, and many lyx users probably never noticed that it was being converted (?). See also my user option suggestion below. I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each converter that tells how lossy conversion is. Without any offense: As a user I would like to have control and not rely on some hidden fuzzy-logic algorithm. Why not an option in preferences-look? This preference pane is almost empty now. What about something like a tick box "Warn when converting vector graphics to bitmap", and secondly an editable field "approx. target resolution for bitmapped images if necessary". A completely different path of course would be to count on ghostscript, but maybe lyx shouldn't depend on that. Anyway, just my suggestions, no urgent need on my side (remember I just found out about the auto-conversion for pdflatex yesterday!) -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: > Good point about the bitmap thing, I'm definitely a vector fan. After > looking a little at the devel mailing archives to get an idea of the > discussion: I may be wrong, but could it be that people wrongly equate > pdf=vector? No, at least I can't remember people doing that. > AFAIK, pdf can hold both types of graphics, and e.g. Yes. > imagemagick can produce pdfs, but *only* with bitmaps (last time I > checked, or am I wrong here?). To my knowledge the only vector ways to > go eps->pdf is ghostscript or acrobat. Again, please correct me if I'm > wrong. And this is the problem: Since converters are user definable, we don't know wether a given eps -> pdf conversion retains vector data or not. > But maybe for output the bitmaps are not so bad as they seem at first. True, but the optimal solution that should be implemented some day would be to retain vector data. >> I guess the best solution would be to associate a cost to each >> converter that tells how lossy conversion is. >> > > Without any offense: As a user I would like to have control and not rely > on some hidden fuzzy-logic algorithm. Why not an option in This is no fuzzy logic, and in order to be usable it would need to be documented. You have complete control over your converters, of course you would also be able to adjust the cost factor. I think it is indeed a useful approach. > preferences-look? This preference pane is almost empty > now. What about something like a tick box "Warn when converting vector > graphics to bitmap", and secondly an editable field "approx. target > resolution for bitmapped images if necessary". The problem is: We don't know always wether a given file contains vector or bitmap data. So we can't issue that warning. > A completely different path of course would be to count on ghostscript, > but maybe lyx shouldn't depend on that. Anyway, just my suggestions, no > urgent need on my side (remember I just found out about the > auto-conversion for pdflatex yesterday!) LyX depends heavily on ghostscript (at least in the default configuration). But again, this is configurable. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote: And this is the problem: Since converters are user definable, we don't know wether a given eps -> pdf conversion retains vector data or not. Ok, now (I think) I understand. True, but the optimal solution that should be implemented some day would be to retain vector data. But this seems to clash with user-definable converters, doesn't it? It almost seems like incompatible design choices: user-choices vs. automatic-good-choices-by-prgoram. No single one is superior per se, but should be followed consistently. This is no fuzzy logic, and in order to be usable it would need to be documented. You have complete control over your converters, of course you would also be able to adjust the cost factor. I think it is indeed a useful approach. I apologize, I didn't understand it properly before. Yes this would be very flexible. Maybe a little simpler would be to have priority rankings for each source format in a couple of drop-down lists. (The graphics preference pane is really empty...;-) ) Of course the user would need to be aware that the output also depends on her converter configuration. ok, have bothered you long enough, take care -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Paul Smith wrote: Thanks, Angus, for your reply to my question. Meanwhile, I had the idea of installing LyX 1.4 cvs and getting tex2lyx. Afterwards, can I get back to LyX 1.3.5 and using tex2lyx without LyX 1.4? Does my idea make some sense? Here's what I did on Windows. Checked out the LyX 1.4.x tree: $ cvs -d ':pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs/lyx' \ login The password is 'lyx' $ cvs -d ':pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs/lyx' \ -z9 checkout -d devel lyx-devel This creates a directory 'devel' containing the entire 1.4.x tree. It's brought over compressed (-z9) to minimize bandwidth. $ cd devel $ ./autogen.sh This generates the Makefile templates (Makefile.in files) and the configure script. $ mkdir build cd build It's nicer not to pollute the source with your build files. $ ../configure --prefix='J:/Programs/LyX' --with-included-gettext $ (cd boost make) $ (cd src/support make) $ (cd src/tex2lyx make install) $ (cd lib make install) This populates 'J:/Programs/LyX' with everything that tex2lyx, reLyX and lyx2lyx could possibly need and then some. I went on to prune lots of unneeded stuff. Note that the 'Resources' directory on Windows is the 'share' directory on Unix. I left only the stuff below. The lyx2lyx and reLyX directories are fully populated. LyX/ bin/ reLyX tex2lyx.exe Resources/ lyx/ chkconfig.ltx credits lyx2lyx/ ... lyx2lyx packages.lst textclass.lst configure layouts/ lyxrc.defaults reLyX/ It took me about 15 minutes to do all that. Using it? See the mail tex2lyx, lyx2lyx round trip is still broken (worse!) on the lyx-devel list. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel:41487 and ensuing thread for a round trip lyx-tex-lyx-tex and attempt to run latex on the .tex files for the LyX user guide. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On 3.02.05, Angus Leeming wrote: Here's what I did on Windows. Maybe I missed the start of this thread, but at least the last 7+ messages did not reveal where I can find tex2lyx for *Linux*. Is it possible to use tex2lyx and lyx2lyx with LyX 1.3.4 on Linux? Are these scripts standalone python scripts or do they use some LyX code? Sincerely Guenter -- G.Milde web.de
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
G. Milde wrote: On 3.02.05, Angus Leeming wrote: Here's what I did on Windows. Maybe I missed the start of this thread, but at least the last 7+ messages did not reveal where I can find tex2lyx for *Linux*. You can't *find* it. Read my reply to the original question. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.general:20140 You can *build* it. I explain how in the mail to which you replied. I'm unwilling to provide tex2lyx executables because the nature of development is that there is of continual improvement. You're much better off regularly updating your cvs tree and building tex2lyx yourself. Is it possible to use tex2lyx and lyx2lyx with LyX 1.3.4 on Linux? Yes. Follow the link on the article you're replying to. The whole thread is visible at http://news.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel Are these scripts standalone python scripts or do they use some LyX code? lyx2lyx is a python script. tex2lyx is a compiled C++ program. Both can be run as standalone apps from the command line. Sincerely Guenter -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote: - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one master version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file. That's great, I didn't know that. I agree it's the right thing to do. Is it documented somewhere? (well, probably in the main user guide?) Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that tells wether the document is for normal latex or pdflatex. This should not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a bit of C++ ;-) Wait a minute, if lyx preserves the portability, why would you need such a switch? If I understand correctly, the master document is just used as input to convert for preview display, right? Then I think the situation is just fine as is. - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but it's also displayed as ERT This is a known problem. It would be nice if you could add that to the wiki page. Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that doesn't exist yet)? -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote:
Georg Baum wrote:
Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one
master version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The
others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if
needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain
portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file.
That's great, I didn't know that. I agree it's the right thing to do. Is
it documented somewhere? (well, probably in the main user guide?)
I don't know.
Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it
finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that
tells wether the document is for normal latex or pdflatex. This should
not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a
bit of C++ ;-)
Wait a minute, if lyx preserves the portability, why would you need such
a switch? If I understand correctly, the master document is just used
as input to convert for preview display, right? Then I think the
situation is just fine as is.
No. The master graphics is used as master for everything. Consider the
following situation: The LyX file includes a figure a.xyz. Converters
exist from xyz - eps and xyz - png. The .tex file contains always
\includegraphics{a} (actually almost always, if you want to know the
details read
http://www.lyx.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/lyx-devel/src/insets/insetgraphics.C?rev=HEADcontent-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup,
look for prepareFile). When you export to pdf using pdflatex, the file
a.png is created. When you export to ps, the file a.eps is created. a.xyz
is always the master, not only for preview, but also for export. Of course
there may be the special case that xyz = pdf or xyz = eps etc.
BTW, I am talking about LyX 1.4 here, it is slightly different in 1.3.
Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that
doesn't exist yet)?
The fact that tex2lyx creates an additional ERT for \bibliographystyle that
should be deleted.
Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote:
No. The master graphics is used as master for everything. Consider the
following situation: The LyX file includes a figure a.xyz. Converters
exist from xyz - eps and xyz - png. The .tex file contains always
\includegraphics{a} (actually almost always, if you want to know the
details read
http://www.lyx.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/lyx-devel/src/insets/insetgraphics.C?rev=HEADcontent-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup,
look for prepareFile). When you export to pdf using pdflatex, the file
a.png is created. When you export to ps, the file a.eps is created. a.xyz
is always the master, not only for preview, but also for export. Of course
there may be the special case that xyz = pdf or xyz = eps etc.
BTW, I am talking about LyX 1.4 here, it is slightly different in 1.3.
Just how slightly different? Because I have this terrible feeling I
wasted much time on unecessary things. Coming from lyx-less pdflatex,
I always kept .eps and .pdf-variants of the same graphics. The Lyx
(1.3.5) extended-features guide seems to say the same thing: 5.3.6.1
Use pdfLaTeX
With pdfLaTeX you need to convert your eps figures to PDF. And on the
wiki page (How LyX handles figures) talk is about preview only.
In contrast, the way you describe it, it sounds wonderful: Skip the
manual pdf-graphics-creation and just have lyx/imagemagick create the
necessary png's on the fly. Just need one .eps (like in the old
days...). That is/would be great!
Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that
doesn't exist yet)?
The fact that tex2lyx creates an additional ERT for \bibliographystyle that
should be deleted.
I meant: which wiki page should it be added to?
-sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Paul Smith wrote: Thanks, Angus, for your reply to my question. Meanwhile, I had the idea of installing LyX 1.4 cvs and getting tex2lyx. Afterwards, can I get back to LyX 1.3.5 and using tex2lyx without LyX 1.4? Does my idea make some sense? Here's what I did on Windows. Checked out the LyX 1.4.x tree: $ cvs -d ':pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs/lyx' \ login The password is 'lyx' $ cvs -d ':pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs/lyx' \ -z9 checkout -d devel lyx-devel This creates a directory 'devel' containing the entire 1.4.x tree. It's brought over compressed (-z9) to minimize bandwidth. $ cd devel $ ./autogen.sh This generates the Makefile templates (Makefile.in files) and the configure script. $ mkdir build cd build It's nicer not to pollute the source with your build files. $ ../configure --prefix='J:/Programs/LyX' --with-included-gettext $ (cd boost make) $ (cd src/support make) $ (cd src/tex2lyx make install) $ (cd lib make install) This populates 'J:/Programs/LyX' with everything that tex2lyx, reLyX and lyx2lyx could possibly need and then some. I went on to prune lots of unneeded stuff. Note that the 'Resources' directory on Windows is the 'share' directory on Unix. I left only the stuff below. The lyx2lyx and reLyX directories are fully populated. LyX/ bin/ reLyX tex2lyx.exe Resources/ lyx/ chkconfig.ltx credits lyx2lyx/ ... lyx2lyx packages.lst textclass.lst configure layouts/ lyxrc.defaults reLyX/ It took me about 15 minutes to do all that. Using it? See the mail tex2lyx, lyx2lyx round trip is still broken (worse!) on the lyx-devel list. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel:41487 and ensuing thread for a round trip lyx-tex-lyx-tex and attempt to run latex on the .tex files for the LyX user guide. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On 3.02.05, Angus Leeming wrote: Here's what I did on Windows. Maybe I missed the start of this thread, but at least the last 7+ messages did not reveal where I can find tex2lyx for *Linux*. Is it possible to use tex2lyx and lyx2lyx with LyX 1.3.4 on Linux? Are these scripts standalone python scripts or do they use some LyX code? Sincerely Guenter -- G.Milde web.de
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
G. Milde wrote: On 3.02.05, Angus Leeming wrote: Here's what I did on Windows. Maybe I missed the start of this thread, but at least the last 7+ messages did not reveal where I can find tex2lyx for *Linux*. You can't *find* it. Read my reply to the original question. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.general:20140 You can *build* it. I explain how in the mail to which you replied. I'm unwilling to provide tex2lyx executables because the nature of development is that there is of continual improvement. You're much better off regularly updating your cvs tree and building tex2lyx yourself. Is it possible to use tex2lyx and lyx2lyx with LyX 1.3.4 on Linux? Yes. Follow the link on the article you're replying to. The whole thread is visible at http://news.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel Are these scripts standalone python scripts or do they use some LyX code? lyx2lyx is a python script. tex2lyx is a compiled C++ program. Both can be run as standalone apps from the command line. Sincerely Guenter -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote: - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one master version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file. That's great, I didn't know that. I agree it's the right thing to do. Is it documented somewhere? (well, probably in the main user guide?) Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that tells wether the document is for normal latex or pdflatex. This should not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a bit of C++ ;-) Wait a minute, if lyx preserves the portability, why would you need such a switch? If I understand correctly, the master document is just used as input to convert for preview display, right? Then I think the situation is just fine as is. - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but it's also displayed as ERT This is a known problem. It would be nice if you could add that to the wiki page. Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that doesn't exist yet)? -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote:
Georg Baum wrote:
Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one
master version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The
others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if
needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain
portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file.
That's great, I didn't know that. I agree it's the right thing to do. Is
it documented somewhere? (well, probably in the main user guide?)
I don't know.
Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it
finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that
tells wether the document is for normal latex or pdflatex. This should
not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a
bit of C++ ;-)
Wait a minute, if lyx preserves the portability, why would you need such
a switch? If I understand correctly, the master document is just used
as input to convert for preview display, right? Then I think the
situation is just fine as is.
No. The master graphics is used as master for everything. Consider the
following situation: The LyX file includes a figure a.xyz. Converters
exist from xyz - eps and xyz - png. The .tex file contains always
\includegraphics{a} (actually almost always, if you want to know the
details read
http://www.lyx.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/lyx-devel/src/insets/insetgraphics.C?rev=HEADcontent-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup,
look for prepareFile). When you export to pdf using pdflatex, the file
a.png is created. When you export to ps, the file a.eps is created. a.xyz
is always the master, not only for preview, but also for export. Of course
there may be the special case that xyz = pdf or xyz = eps etc.
BTW, I am talking about LyX 1.4 here, it is slightly different in 1.3.
Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that
doesn't exist yet)?
The fact that tex2lyx creates an additional ERT for \bibliographystyle that
should be deleted.
Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote:
No. The master graphics is used as master for everything. Consider the
following situation: The LyX file includes a figure a.xyz. Converters
exist from xyz - eps and xyz - png. The .tex file contains always
\includegraphics{a} (actually almost always, if you want to know the
details read
http://www.lyx.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/lyx-devel/src/insets/insetgraphics.C?rev=HEADcontent-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup,
look for prepareFile). When you export to pdf using pdflatex, the file
a.png is created. When you export to ps, the file a.eps is created. a.xyz
is always the master, not only for preview, but also for export. Of course
there may be the special case that xyz = pdf or xyz = eps etc.
BTW, I am talking about LyX 1.4 here, it is slightly different in 1.3.
Just how slightly different? Because I have this terrible feeling I
wasted much time on unecessary things. Coming from lyx-less pdflatex,
I always kept .eps and .pdf-variants of the same graphics. The Lyx
(1.3.5) extended-features guide seems to say the same thing: 5.3.6.1
Use pdfLaTeX
With pdfLaTeX you need to convert your eps figures to PDF. And on the
wiki page (How LyX handles figures) talk is about preview only.
In contrast, the way you describe it, it sounds wonderful: Skip the
manual pdf-graphics-creation and just have lyx/imagemagick create the
necessary png's on the fly. Just need one .eps (like in the old
days...). That is/would be great!
Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that
doesn't exist yet)?
The fact that tex2lyx creates an additional ERT for \bibliographystyle that
should be deleted.
I meant: which wiki page should it be added to?
-sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Paul Smith wrote: > Thanks, Angus, for your reply to my question. Meanwhile, I had the > idea of installing LyX 1.4 cvs and getting tex2lyx. Afterwards, can I > get back to LyX 1.3.5 and using tex2lyx without LyX 1.4? Does my idea > make some sense? Here's what I did on Windows. Checked out the LyX 1.4.x tree: $ cvs -d ':pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs/lyx' \ login The password is 'lyx' $ cvs -d ':pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvs/lyx' \ -z9 checkout -d devel lyx-devel This creates a directory 'devel' containing the entire 1.4.x tree. It's brought over compressed (-z9) to minimize bandwidth. $ cd devel $ ./autogen.sh This generates the Makefile templates (Makefile.in files) and the configure script. $ mkdir build && cd build It's nicer not to pollute the source with your build files. $ ../configure --prefix='J:/Programs/LyX' --with-included-gettext $ (cd boost && make) $ (cd src/support && make) $ (cd src/tex2lyx && make install) $ (cd lib && make install) This populates 'J:/Programs/LyX' with everything that tex2lyx, reLyX and lyx2lyx could possibly need and then some. I went on to prune lots of unneeded stuff. Note that the 'Resources' directory on Windows is the 'share' directory on Unix. I left only the stuff below. The lyx2lyx and reLyX directories are fully populated. LyX/ bin/ reLyX tex2lyx.exe Resources/ lyx/ chkconfig.ltx credits lyx2lyx/ ... lyx2lyx packages.lst textclass.lst configure layouts/ lyxrc.defaults reLyX/ It took me about 15 minutes to do all that. Using it? See the mail "tex2lyx, lyx2lyx round trip is still broken (worse!)" on the lyx-devel list. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel:41487 and ensuing thread for a round trip lyx->tex->lyx->tex and attempt to run latex on the .tex files for the LyX user guide. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On 3.02.05, Angus Leeming wrote: > > Here's what I did on Windows. Maybe I missed the start of this thread, but at least the last 7+ messages did not reveal where I can find tex2lyx for *Linux*. Is it possible to use tex2lyx and lyx2lyx with LyX 1.3.4 on Linux? Are these scripts standalone python scripts or do they use some LyX code? Sincerely Guenter -- G.Milde web.de
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
G. Milde wrote: > On 3.02.05, Angus Leeming wrote: >> >> Here's what I did on Windows. > > Maybe I missed the start of this thread, but at least the last 7+ > messages did not reveal where I can find tex2lyx for *Linux*. You can't *find* it. Read my reply to the original question. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.general:20140 You can *build* it. I explain how in the mail to which you replied. I'm unwilling to provide tex2lyx executables because the nature of development is that there is of continual improvement. You're much better off regularly updating your cvs tree and building tex2lyx yourself. > Is it possible to use tex2lyx and lyx2lyx with LyX 1.3.4 on Linux? Yes. Follow the link on the article you're replying to. The whole thread is visible at http://news.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.devel > Are these scripts standalone python scripts or do they use some LyX code? lyx2lyx is a python script. tex2lyx is a compiled C++ program. Both can be run as standalone apps from the command line. > Sincerely > Guenter -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote: - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one "master" version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file. That's great, I didn't know that. I agree it's the right thing to do. Is it documented somewhere? (well, probably in the main user guide?) Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that tells wether the document is for "normal" latex or pdflatex. This should not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a bit of C++ ;-) Wait a minute, if lyx preserves the portability, why would you need such a switch? If I understand correctly, the "master" document is just used as input to convert for preview display, right? Then I think the situation is just fine "as is". - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but it's also displayed as ERT This is a known problem. It would be nice if you could add that to the wiki page. Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that doesn't exist yet)? -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote:
> Georg Baum wrote:
>> Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one
>> "master" version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The
>> others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if
>> needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain
>> portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file.
>
> That's great, I didn't know that. I agree it's the right thing to do. Is
> it documented somewhere? (well, probably in the main user guide?)
I don't know.
>> Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it
>> finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that
>> tells wether the document is for "normal" latex or pdflatex. This should
>> not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a
>> bit of C++ ;-)
>
> Wait a minute, if lyx preserves the portability, why would you need such
> a switch? If I understand correctly, the "master" document is just used
> as input to convert for preview display, right? Then I think the
> situation is just fine "as is".
No. The master graphics is used as master for everything. Consider the
following situation: The LyX file includes a figure "a.xyz". Converters
exist from xyz -> eps and xyz -> png. The .tex file contains always
\includegraphics{a} (actually almost always, if you want to know the
details read
http://www.lyx.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/lyx-devel/src/insets/insetgraphics.C?rev=HEAD=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup,
look for prepareFile). When you export to pdf using pdflatex, the file
a.png is created. When you export to ps, the file a.eps is created. a.xyz
is always the master, not only for preview, but also for export. Of course
there may be the special case that xyz = pdf or xyz = eps etc.
BTW, I am talking about LyX 1.4 here, it is slightly different in 1.3.
> Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that
> doesn't exist yet)?
The fact that tex2lyx creates an additional ERT for \bibliographystyle that
should be deleted.
Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Georg Baum wrote:
No. The master graphics is used as master for everything. Consider the
following situation: The LyX file includes a figure "a.xyz". Converters
exist from xyz -> eps and xyz -> png. The .tex file contains always
\includegraphics{a} (actually almost always, if you want to know the
details read
http://www.lyx.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/lyx-devel/src/insets/insetgraphics.C?rev=HEAD=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup,
look for prepareFile). When you export to pdf using pdflatex, the file
a.png is created. When you export to ps, the file a.eps is created. a.xyz
is always the master, not only for preview, but also for export. Of course
there may be the special case that xyz = pdf or xyz = eps etc.
BTW, I am talking about LyX 1.4 here, it is slightly different in 1.3.
Just how "slightly" different? Because I have this terrible feeling I
wasted much time on unecessary things. Coming from lyx-less pdflatex,
I always kept .eps and .pdf-variants of the same graphics. The Lyx
(1.3.5) extended-features guide seems to say the same thing: "5.3.6.1
Use pdfLaTeX
With pdfLaTeX you need to convert your eps figures to PDF". And on the
wiki page ("How LyX handles figures") talk is about preview only.
In contrast, the way you describe it, it sounds wonderful: Skip the
manual pdf-graphics-creation and just have lyx/imagemagick create the
necessary png's on the fly. Just need one .eps (like in the old
days...). That is/would be great!
Which one? The one I suggested about relyx and then tex2lyx (and that
doesn't exist yet)?
The fact that tex2lyx creates an additional ERT for \bibliographystyle that
should be deleted.
I meant: which wiki page should it be added to?
-sven
tex2lyx for Linux
Dear All I remember Angus has recently produced a version of tex2lyx for MS Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run autonomously, that is, without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? Thanks in advance, Paul
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
I would be interested too.. I would also be interested in a tex2lyx standalone (ie. would run without one having lyx in his system) if this is possible. I just downloaded Angus's tex2lyx but Im not sure if it works for window users who installed lyx using cygwin (I didnt tried other lyx versions for windows ... I thought since I have cygwin already I will just do with this version), it wasnt able to find the .ltx file even if I put it in the sysdir parameter of tex2lyx. ... but then again, I dont think this was meant to be used in cygwin. Sincerely, Jose Capco --- Paul Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear All I remember Angus has recently produced a version of tex2lyx for MS Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run autonomously, that is, without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? Thanks in advance, Paul __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Paul Smith wrote: Dear All I remember Angus has recently produced a version of tex2lyx for MS Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run autonomously, that is, without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? No, because different flavours of linux have different run time libraries and a single binary would probably crash mysteriously. It really isn't that hard to build if you have a compiler installed. I think I did: ./autogen.sh mkdir build cd build ../configure (cd boost make) (cd src/support make) (cd src/tex2lyx make install) (cd lib make install) and then pruned the resulting $PREFIX/share/lyx directory to the state I described in the original mail. Took maybe 10 minutes to do? Of course, I have a functioning build environment, but that should be a doddle to set up on a modern linux machine. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jose Capco wrote: I would be interested too.. I would also be interested in a tex2lyx standalone (ie. would run without one having lyx in his system) if this is possible. I just downloaded Angus's tex2lyx but Im not sure if it works for window users who installed lyx using cygwin (I didnt tried other lyx versions for windows ... I thought since I have cygwin already I will just do with this version), it wasnt able to find the .ltx file even if I put it in the sysdir parameter of tex2lyx. ... but then again, I dont think this was meant to be used in cygwin. Sincerely, Jose Capco This is a native Windows executable. It doesn't understand Cygwin-style, posix-ish paths. Can you run it from a CMD prompt? Ie, pass it Windows-style paths as I did in the example I posted. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
No! In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just to test this and it didnt worked I installed the windows port in C:\Lyx directory.. and then extracted the file in the tex2lyx zipfile you posted today to their respective paths and then after running I got something like -- Unable to determine the path to the LyX binary from the command line tex2lyx in the shell (I put the bin directory in my path so I can run tex2lyx anywhere.. but it didnt even worked when I tried it where it was copied). Jose Capco --- Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a native Windows executable. It doesn't understand Cygwin-style, posix-ish paths. Can you run it from a CMD prompt? Ie, pass it Windows-style paths as I did in the example I posted. -- Angus __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 13:31, you wrote: No! Ach! In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just to test this and it didnt worked Why did you think you needed this? I installed the windows port in C:\Lyx directory.. and then extracted the file in the tex2lyx zipfile you posted today to their respective paths and then after running I got something like Just a second. tex2lyx expects to find the support files in a directory ..\Resources\lyx relative to the directory holding the binary itself. If you have copied only the tex2lyx binary then that's not going to work. Please use the whole package. Install it as (say) C:\tex2lyx. Whatever. -- Unable to determine the path to the LyX binary from the command line tex2lyx What happens if you specify the full path to the binary C:\tex2lyx\bin\tex2lyx.exe (Sorry to sound so silly. It turns out Lars broke lots of file-related things on Windows the other day and we're trying to clear up the mess.) in the shell (I put the bin directory in my path so I can run tex2lyx anywhere.. but it didnt even worked when I tried it where it was copied). Jose Capco Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just to test this and it didnt worked Why did you think you needed this? you told me that the cygwin thingy isn't recognized. Just a second. tex2lyx expects to find the support files in a directory ..\Resources\lyx relative to the directory holding the binary itself. If you have copied only the tex2lyx binary then that's not going to work. Please use the whole package. Install it as (say) C:tex2lyx. Whatever. Nono, I installed the whole stuff... but no need to worry I got it working, and guess what was the problem! When running the file I need to specify exactly the location of tex2lyx (like you put it in your example) I need to type c:\lyx\bin\tex2lyx.exe input.tex input.lyx I can't get through this by just putting the binaries for lyx into the path environment and then just type tex2lyx.exe input... blah But I still need to figure out how to make lyx2lyx work.. I tried the way you called lyx2lyx by typing python C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx test but got 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback Traceback (most recent call last): File C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx, line 19, in ? import getopt ImportError: No module named getopt I didn't understand your example, I was however able to read the output lyx using the recent available version , I'm not sure if it would be looking the same had I lyx2lyxed it... it looks .. er not bad if I don't don't use packages in my LaTeX. I wonder how to go through newcommand stuffs in the preamble, putting that in the preamble, I'll try to start all over and write the preamble in lyx itself and not tex2lyx yet. could you give me a tex you wrote and know that it converts to lyx perfectly.. I need to know what to and what not to put. Sincerely, Jose Capco __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 15:58, Jose Capco wrote: 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback Traceback (most recent call last): File C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx, line 19, in ? import getopt ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. -- José Abílio
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jose' Matos wrote: On Wednesday 02 February 2005 15:58, Jose Capco wrote: 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback Traceback (most recent call last): File C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx, line 19, in ? import getopt ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included python installation cannot handle it. -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included python installation cannot handle it. You might be doing Ruurd a slight disservice there. We're playing here with the lyx2lyx that is bundled with LyX 1.4.x, not the version that comes with LyX/Win 1.3.x. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Angus Leeming wrote: Sven Schreiber wrote: ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included python installation cannot handle it. You might be doing Ruurd a slight disservice there. We're playing here with the lyx2lyx that is bundled with LyX 1.4.x, not the version that comes with LyX/Win 1.3.x. I didn't intend any offense, it was Ruurd's work that made it possible for me to use lyx regularly in the first place, and I very much appreciate it. Just wanted to point out where I think the error message stems from. And that it seems to me that renaming lyx2lyx to lyx2lyx.py as was discussed before will not remedy the fact that the bundled-with-Ruurds-lyxwin python doesn't seem to handle it. btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, or will testing start later on? cheers, sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 16:58 schrieb Jose Capco: I didn't understand your example, I was however able to read the output lyx using the recent available version , I'm not sure if it would be looking the same had I lyx2lyxed it... it looks .. er not bad if I don't don't use packages in my LaTeX. I wonder how to go through newcommand stuffs in the preamble, putting that in the preamble, I'll try to start all over and write the preamble in lyx itself and not tex2lyx yet. If you have lyx2lyx working, you should be able to put everything into the preamble that you like. tex2lyx does not really touch the preamble, but it extracts certain packages that have builtin LyX support. could you give me a tex you wrote and know that it converts to lyx perfectly.. I need to know what to and what not to put. Please do it the other way round: get your lyx2lyx woking, and then convert your document and tell us what does not work. Apart from certain tabular features (i. e. advanced column settings) and some advanced expert tex stuff everything should more or less work. If it does not, it may be easy to fix, but we need to know about it. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
ok great.. so I'll just wait until the 1.4.x comes up and the python er... anyway I'll just let 1.3.x import the 1.4.x lyxs which are still readable (but probably... Im not sure though, that after relyxing things would look better). and also, if the owner of this mailing list also reads this... could you please setup the listbot to send the emails so that when I hit the reply button it will send to the list rather than the individul users (I think that is possible, the listbot did an email redirection when I first subscribed to the list). Sincerely, Jose Capco --- Sven Schreiber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't intend any offense, it was Ruurd's work that made it possible for me to use lyx regularly in the first place, and I very much appreciate it. Just wanted to point out where I think the error message stems from. And that it seems to me that renaming lyx2lyx to lyx2lyx.py as was discussed before will not remedy the fact that the bundled-with-Ruurds-lyxwin python doesn't seem to handle it. --- snip cheers, sven __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
I'd love to be the guinea pig.. the boss cant write with LaTeX and this is the only way out. I'll send feedbacks. Jose Capco PS: I'll try experimenting on importing packages and using \newcommands on the preamble.. if anyone knows that this work then please advise. --- Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please do it the other way round: get your lyx2lyx woking, and then convert your document and tell us what does not work. Apart from certain tabular features (i. e. advanced column settings) and some advanced expert tex stuff everything should more or less work. If it does not, it may be easy to fix, but we need to know about it. Georg __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, or will testing start later on? Feedback is good. Apart from the obvious file name problem that Jose has had trouble with, there's a small bug in the latex parser that was corrected yesterday by Georg Baum. I've posted an updated version to http://www.devel.lyx.org/~leeming/tex2lyx_win32_02Feb05.zip but preliminary testings suggest that it is struggling with more file name problems. I'm out of town for a week or so as of Friday. I'd hope and expect things to be better by the time I return. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Angus Leeming wrote: Sven Schreiber wrote: btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, or will testing start later on? Feedback is good. Apart from the obvious file name problem that Jose has had trouble with, there's a small bug in the latex parser that was corrected yesterday by Georg Baum. I've posted an updated version to http://www.devel.lyx.org/~leeming/tex2lyx_win32_02Feb05.zip but preliminary testings suggest that it is struggling with more file name problems. I'm out of town for a week or so as of Friday. I'd hope and expect things to be better by the time I return. Overall I'm quite impressed! But it still required some corrections afterwards, although I suspect some problems may be windows-specific (e.g. because of line-ending characters -- although I used an editor to try both unixish and windowsish settings without any difference!?). And I ended up using absolute paths everywhere for includegraphics as a simple workaround, because relative ones didn't work (tex2lyx complained couldn't find). Also remember that my comments apply to the whole tex2lyx-lyx2lyx-lyx1.3 trip, I cannot say where exactly things are happening. Some other things: - complains when \includegraphics* (starred variant) is used, while it could just be treated as the unstarred version (or am I missing something?) - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but it's also displayed as ERT - imports the \thanks-field inside the \title as ERT - has problems with my complicated \author-field (can't blame it too much, this includes minipages and graphics) - tables are fine! so much for that, thanks again for making it available -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 19:03 schrieb Jose Capco: and also, if the owner of this mailing list also reads this... could you please setup the listbot to send the emails so that when I hit the reply button it will send to the list rather than the individul users (I think that is possible, the listbot did an email redirection when I first subscribed to the list). It is possible, but not wanted. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: Overall I'm quite impressed! But it still required some corrections afterwards, although I suspect some problems may be windows-specific (e.g. because of line-ending characters -- although I used an editor to try both unixish and windowsish settings without any difference!?). Georg has just committed another fix. Apparently a '\n' character became \\n. I'll try and upload a new version. And I ended up using absolute paths everywhere for includegraphics as a simple workaround, because relative ones didn't work (tex2lyx complained couldn't find). Almost certainly this recently-introduced file horkage I've mentioned. Later, Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Thanks, Angus, for your reply to my question. Meanwhile, I had the idea of installing LyX 1.4 cvs and getting tex2lyx. Afterwards, can I get back to LyX 1.3.5 and using tex2lyx without LyX 1.4? Does my idea make some sense? Paul
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 20:37 schrieb Sven Schreiber: - complains when \includegraphics* (starred variant) is used, while it could just be treated as the unstarred version (or am I missing something?) \includegraphics* is equivalent to \includegraphics[clip]. I implemented \includegraphics* right now, it will appear in CVS soon. I guess that there are a lot of such simple things that are easy to implement (5 lines of code in this case), but that we simply need to be aware of. - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one master version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file. Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that tells wether the document is for normal latex or pdflatex. This should not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a bit of C++ ;-) - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but it's also displayed as ERT This is a known problem. It would be nice if you could add that to the wiki page. Georg
tex2lyx for Linux
Dear All I remember Angus has recently produced a version of tex2lyx for MS Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run autonomously, that is, without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? Thanks in advance, Paul
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
I would be interested too.. I would also be interested in a tex2lyx standalone (ie. would run without one having lyx in his system) if this is possible. I just downloaded Angus's tex2lyx but Im not sure if it works for window users who installed lyx using cygwin (I didnt tried other lyx versions for windows ... I thought since I have cygwin already I will just do with this version), it wasnt able to find the .ltx file even if I put it in the sysdir parameter of tex2lyx. ... but then again, I dont think this was meant to be used in cygwin. Sincerely, Jose Capco --- Paul Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear All I remember Angus has recently produced a version of tex2lyx for MS Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run autonomously, that is, without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? Thanks in advance, Paul __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Paul Smith wrote: Dear All I remember Angus has recently produced a version of tex2lyx for MS Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run autonomously, that is, without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? No, because different flavours of linux have different run time libraries and a single binary would probably crash mysteriously. It really isn't that hard to build if you have a compiler installed. I think I did: ./autogen.sh mkdir build cd build ../configure (cd boost make) (cd src/support make) (cd src/tex2lyx make install) (cd lib make install) and then pruned the resulting $PREFIX/share/lyx directory to the state I described in the original mail. Took maybe 10 minutes to do? Of course, I have a functioning build environment, but that should be a doddle to set up on a modern linux machine. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jose Capco wrote: I would be interested too.. I would also be interested in a tex2lyx standalone (ie. would run without one having lyx in his system) if this is possible. I just downloaded Angus's tex2lyx but Im not sure if it works for window users who installed lyx using cygwin (I didnt tried other lyx versions for windows ... I thought since I have cygwin already I will just do with this version), it wasnt able to find the .ltx file even if I put it in the sysdir parameter of tex2lyx. ... but then again, I dont think this was meant to be used in cygwin. Sincerely, Jose Capco This is a native Windows executable. It doesn't understand Cygwin-style, posix-ish paths. Can you run it from a CMD prompt? Ie, pass it Windows-style paths as I did in the example I posted. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
No! In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just to test this and it didnt worked I installed the windows port in C:\Lyx directory.. and then extracted the file in the tex2lyx zipfile you posted today to their respective paths and then after running I got something like -- Unable to determine the path to the LyX binary from the command line tex2lyx in the shell (I put the bin directory in my path so I can run tex2lyx anywhere.. but it didnt even worked when I tried it where it was copied). Jose Capco --- Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a native Windows executable. It doesn't understand Cygwin-style, posix-ish paths. Can you run it from a CMD prompt? Ie, pass it Windows-style paths as I did in the example I posted. -- Angus __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 13:31, you wrote: No! Ach! In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just to test this and it didnt worked Why did you think you needed this? I installed the windows port in C:\Lyx directory.. and then extracted the file in the tex2lyx zipfile you posted today to their respective paths and then after running I got something like Just a second. tex2lyx expects to find the support files in a directory ..\Resources\lyx relative to the directory holding the binary itself. If you have copied only the tex2lyx binary then that's not going to work. Please use the whole package. Install it as (say) C:\tex2lyx. Whatever. -- Unable to determine the path to the LyX binary from the command line tex2lyx What happens if you specify the full path to the binary C:\tex2lyx\bin\tex2lyx.exe (Sorry to sound so silly. It turns out Lars broke lots of file-related things on Windows the other day and we're trying to clear up the mess.) in the shell (I put the bin directory in my path so I can run tex2lyx anywhere.. but it didnt even worked when I tried it where it was copied). Jose Capco Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just to test this and it didnt worked Why did you think you needed this? you told me that the cygwin thingy isn't recognized. Just a second. tex2lyx expects to find the support files in a directory ..\Resources\lyx relative to the directory holding the binary itself. If you have copied only the tex2lyx binary then that's not going to work. Please use the whole package. Install it as (say) C:tex2lyx. Whatever. Nono, I installed the whole stuff... but no need to worry I got it working, and guess what was the problem! When running the file I need to specify exactly the location of tex2lyx (like you put it in your example) I need to type c:\lyx\bin\tex2lyx.exe input.tex input.lyx I can't get through this by just putting the binaries for lyx into the path environment and then just type tex2lyx.exe input... blah But I still need to figure out how to make lyx2lyx work.. I tried the way you called lyx2lyx by typing python C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx test but got 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback Traceback (most recent call last): File C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx, line 19, in ? import getopt ImportError: No module named getopt I didn't understand your example, I was however able to read the output lyx using the recent available version , I'm not sure if it would be looking the same had I lyx2lyxed it... it looks .. er not bad if I don't don't use packages in my LaTeX. I wonder how to go through newcommand stuffs in the preamble, putting that in the preamble, I'll try to start all over and write the preamble in lyx itself and not tex2lyx yet. could you give me a tex you wrote and know that it converts to lyx perfectly.. I need to know what to and what not to put. Sincerely, Jose Capco __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 15:58, Jose Capco wrote: 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback Traceback (most recent call last): File C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx, line 19, in ? import getopt ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. -- José Abílio
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jose' Matos wrote: On Wednesday 02 February 2005 15:58, Jose Capco wrote: 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback Traceback (most recent call last): File C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx, line 19, in ? import getopt ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included python installation cannot handle it. -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included python installation cannot handle it. You might be doing Ruurd a slight disservice there. We're playing here with the lyx2lyx that is bundled with LyX 1.4.x, not the version that comes with LyX/Win 1.3.x. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Angus Leeming wrote: Sven Schreiber wrote: ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included python installation cannot handle it. You might be doing Ruurd a slight disservice there. We're playing here with the lyx2lyx that is bundled with LyX 1.4.x, not the version that comes with LyX/Win 1.3.x. I didn't intend any offense, it was Ruurd's work that made it possible for me to use lyx regularly in the first place, and I very much appreciate it. Just wanted to point out where I think the error message stems from. And that it seems to me that renaming lyx2lyx to lyx2lyx.py as was discussed before will not remedy the fact that the bundled-with-Ruurds-lyxwin python doesn't seem to handle it. btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, or will testing start later on? cheers, sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 16:58 schrieb Jose Capco: I didn't understand your example, I was however able to read the output lyx using the recent available version , I'm not sure if it would be looking the same had I lyx2lyxed it... it looks .. er not bad if I don't don't use packages in my LaTeX. I wonder how to go through newcommand stuffs in the preamble, putting that in the preamble, I'll try to start all over and write the preamble in lyx itself and not tex2lyx yet. If you have lyx2lyx working, you should be able to put everything into the preamble that you like. tex2lyx does not really touch the preamble, but it extracts certain packages that have builtin LyX support. could you give me a tex you wrote and know that it converts to lyx perfectly.. I need to know what to and what not to put. Please do it the other way round: get your lyx2lyx woking, and then convert your document and tell us what does not work. Apart from certain tabular features (i. e. advanced column settings) and some advanced expert tex stuff everything should more or less work. If it does not, it may be easy to fix, but we need to know about it. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
ok great.. so I'll just wait until the 1.4.x comes up and the python er... anyway I'll just let 1.3.x import the 1.4.x lyxs which are still readable (but probably... Im not sure though, that after relyxing things would look better). and also, if the owner of this mailing list also reads this... could you please setup the listbot to send the emails so that when I hit the reply button it will send to the list rather than the individul users (I think that is possible, the listbot did an email redirection when I first subscribed to the list). Sincerely, Jose Capco --- Sven Schreiber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't intend any offense, it was Ruurd's work that made it possible for me to use lyx regularly in the first place, and I very much appreciate it. Just wanted to point out where I think the error message stems from. And that it seems to me that renaming lyx2lyx to lyx2lyx.py as was discussed before will not remedy the fact that the bundled-with-Ruurds-lyxwin python doesn't seem to handle it. --- snip cheers, sven __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
I'd love to be the guinea pig.. the boss cant write with LaTeX and this is the only way out. I'll send feedbacks. Jose Capco PS: I'll try experimenting on importing packages and using \newcommands on the preamble.. if anyone knows that this work then please advise. --- Georg Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please do it the other way round: get your lyx2lyx woking, and then convert your document and tell us what does not work. Apart from certain tabular features (i. e. advanced column settings) and some advanced expert tex stuff everything should more or less work. If it does not, it may be easy to fix, but we need to know about it. Georg __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, or will testing start later on? Feedback is good. Apart from the obvious file name problem that Jose has had trouble with, there's a small bug in the latex parser that was corrected yesterday by Georg Baum. I've posted an updated version to http://www.devel.lyx.org/~leeming/tex2lyx_win32_02Feb05.zip but preliminary testings suggest that it is struggling with more file name problems. I'm out of town for a week or so as of Friday. I'd hope and expect things to be better by the time I return. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Angus Leeming wrote: Sven Schreiber wrote: btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, or will testing start later on? Feedback is good. Apart from the obvious file name problem that Jose has had trouble with, there's a small bug in the latex parser that was corrected yesterday by Georg Baum. I've posted an updated version to http://www.devel.lyx.org/~leeming/tex2lyx_win32_02Feb05.zip but preliminary testings suggest that it is struggling with more file name problems. I'm out of town for a week or so as of Friday. I'd hope and expect things to be better by the time I return. Overall I'm quite impressed! But it still required some corrections afterwards, although I suspect some problems may be windows-specific (e.g. because of line-ending characters -- although I used an editor to try both unixish and windowsish settings without any difference!?). And I ended up using absolute paths everywhere for includegraphics as a simple workaround, because relative ones didn't work (tex2lyx complained couldn't find). Also remember that my comments apply to the whole tex2lyx-lyx2lyx-lyx1.3 trip, I cannot say where exactly things are happening. Some other things: - complains when \includegraphics* (starred variant) is used, while it could just be treated as the unstarred version (or am I missing something?) - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but it's also displayed as ERT - imports the \thanks-field inside the \title as ERT - has problems with my complicated \author-field (can't blame it too much, this includes minipages and graphics) - tables are fine! so much for that, thanks again for making it available -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 19:03 schrieb Jose Capco: and also, if the owner of this mailing list also reads this... could you please setup the listbot to send the emails so that when I hit the reply button it will send to the list rather than the individul users (I think that is possible, the listbot did an email redirection when I first subscribed to the list). It is possible, but not wanted. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: Overall I'm quite impressed! But it still required some corrections afterwards, although I suspect some problems may be windows-specific (e.g. because of line-ending characters -- although I used an editor to try both unixish and windowsish settings without any difference!?). Georg has just committed another fix. Apparently a '\n' character became \\n. I'll try and upload a new version. And I ended up using absolute paths everywhere for includegraphics as a simple workaround, because relative ones didn't work (tex2lyx complained couldn't find). Almost certainly this recently-introduced file horkage I've mentioned. Later, Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Thanks, Angus, for your reply to my question. Meanwhile, I had the idea of installing LyX 1.4 cvs and getting tex2lyx. Afterwards, can I get back to LyX 1.3.5 and using tex2lyx without LyX 1.4? Does my idea make some sense? Paul
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 20:37 schrieb Sven Schreiber: - complains when \includegraphics* (starred variant) is used, while it could just be treated as the unstarred version (or am I missing something?) \includegraphics* is equivalent to \includegraphics[clip]. I implemented \includegraphics* right now, it will appear in CVS soon. I guess that there are a lot of such simple things that are easy to implement (5 lines of code in this case), but that we simply need to be aware of. - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one master version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file. Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that tells wether the document is for normal latex or pdflatex. This should not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a bit of C++ ;-) - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but it's also displayed as ERT This is a known problem. It would be nice if you could add that to the wiki page. Georg
tex2lyx for Linux
Dear All I remember Angus has recently produced a version of tex2lyx for MS Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run autonomously, that is, without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? Thanks in advance, Paul
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
I would be interested too.. I would also be interested in a tex2lyx standalone (ie. would run without one having lyx in his system) if this is possible. I just downloaded Angus's tex2lyx but Im not sure if it works for window users who installed lyx using cygwin (I didnt tried other lyx versions for windows ... I thought since I have cygwin already I will just do with this version), it wasnt able to find the .ltx file even if I put it in the sysdir parameter of tex2lyx. ... but then again, I dont think this was meant to be used in cygwin. Sincerely, Jose Capco --- Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear All > > I remember Angus has recently produced a version of > tex2lyx for MS > Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run > autonomously, that is, > without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? > > Thanks in advance, > > Paul > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Paul Smith wrote: > Dear All > > I remember Angus has recently produced a version of tex2lyx for MS > Windows. Is there a Linux version of it to run autonomously, that is, > without having LyX 1.4 cvs installed? No, because different flavours of linux have different run time libraries and a single binary would probably crash mysteriously. It really isn't that hard to build if you have a compiler installed. I think I did: ./autogen.sh mkdir build && cd build ../configure (cd boost && make) (cd src/support && make) (cd src/tex2lyx && make install) (cd lib && make install) and then pruned the resulting $PREFIX/share/lyx directory to the state I described in the original mail. Took maybe 10 minutes to do? Of course, I have a functioning build environment, but that should be a doddle to set up on a modern linux machine. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jose Capco wrote: > I would be interested too.. I would also be interested > in a tex2lyx standalone (ie. would run without one > having lyx in his system) if this is possible. I just > downloaded Angus's tex2lyx but Im not sure if it works > for window users who installed lyx using cygwin (I > didnt tried other lyx versions for windows ... I > thought since I have cygwin already I will just do > with this version), it wasnt able to find the .ltx > file even if I put it in the sysdir parameter of > tex2lyx. > > ... but then again, I dont think this was meant to be > used in cygwin. > > Sincerely, > Jose Capco This is a native Windows executable. It doesn't understand Cygwin-style, posix-ish paths. Can you run it from a CMD prompt? Ie, pass it Windows-style paths as I did in the example I posted. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
No! In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just to test this and it didnt worked I installed the windows port in C:\Lyx directory.. and then extracted the file in the tex2lyx zipfile you posted today to their respective paths and then after running I got something like -- Unable to determine the path to the LyX binary from the command line tex2lyx in the shell (I put the bin directory in my path so I can run tex2lyx anywhere.. but it didnt even worked when I tried it where it was copied). Jose Capco --- Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is a native Windows executable. It doesn't > understand Cygwin-style, > posix-ish paths. > > Can you run it from a CMD prompt? Ie, pass it > Windows-style paths as I did > in the example I posted. > > -- > Angus > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 13:31, you wrote: > No! Ach! > In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just > to test this and it didnt worked Why did you think you needed this? > I installed the windows port in C:\Lyx directory.. and > then extracted the file in the tex2lyx zipfile you > posted today to their respective paths and then after > running I got something like Just a second. tex2lyx expects to find the support files in a directory ..\Resources\lyx relative to the directory holding the binary itself. If you have copied only the tex2lyx binary then that's not going to work. Please use the whole package. Install it as (say) C:\tex2lyx. Whatever. > -- > Unable to determine the path to the LyX binary from > the command line tex2lyx > What happens if you specify the full path to the binary C:\tex2lyx\bin\tex2lyx.exe (Sorry to sound so silly. It turns out Lars broke lots of file-related things on Windows the other day and we're trying to clear up the mess.) > in the shell (I put the bin directory in my path so I > can run tex2lyx anywhere.. but it didnt even worked > when I tried it where it was copied). > > Jose Capco Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
> > In fact I even installed Ruurd Reitsma's port just > > > to test this and it didnt worked > > Why did you think you needed this? you told me that the cygwin thingy isn't recognized. > Just a second. tex2lyx expects to find the support > files in a > directory ..\Resources\lyx relative to the directory > holding the > binary itself. If you have copied only the tex2lyx > binary then that's > not going to work. Please use the whole package. > Install it as (say) > C:tex2lyx. Whatever. Nono, I installed the whole stuff... but no need to worry I got it working, and guess what was the problem! When running the file I need to specify exactly the location of tex2lyx (like you put it in your example) I need to type c:\lyx\bin\tex2lyx.exe input.tex > input.lyx I can't get through this by just putting the binaries for lyx into the path environment and then just type tex2lyx.exe input... blah But I still need to figure out how to make lyx2lyx work.. I tried the way you called lyx2lyx by typing python C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx test but got 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx", line 19, in ? import getopt ImportError: No module named getopt I didn't understand your example, I was however able to read the output lyx using the recent available version , I'm not sure if it would be looking the same had I lyx2lyxed it... it looks .. er not bad if I don't don't use packages in my LaTeX. I wonder how to go through newcommand stuffs in the preamble, putting that in the preamble, I'll try to start all over and write the preamble in lyx itself and not tex2lyx yet. could you give me a tex you wrote and know that it converts to lyx perfectly.. I need to know what to and what not to put. Sincerely, Jose Capco __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 15:58, Jose Capco wrote: > 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx", line > 19, in ? > import getopt > ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. -- José Abílio
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Jose' Matos wrote: On Wednesday 02 February 2005 15:58, Jose Capco wrote: 'import site' failed; use -v for traceback Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\LyX\Resources\lyx\lyx2lyx\lyx2lyx", line 19, in ? import getopt ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included python installation cannot handle it. -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: >>>ImportError: No module named getopt >> >> Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete >> python installation. >> > Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the > LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a > complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it > seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it > isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included > python installation cannot handle it. You might be doing Ruurd a slight disservice there. We're playing here with the lyx2lyx that is bundled with LyX 1.4.x, not the version that comes with LyX/Win 1.3.x. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Angus Leeming wrote: Sven Schreiber wrote: ImportError: No module named getopt Last time we saw this error this was the result of a bad or incomplete python installation. Actually it's the stripped-down python version always installed by the LyxWin package. Due to PATH settings it can get called even though a complete python installation is also on the system. In that sense it seems that in the LyxWin-package lyx2lyx is doubly broken: first it isn't recognized on windows as a python script, and second the included python installation cannot handle it. You might be doing Ruurd a slight disservice there. We're playing here with the lyx2lyx that is bundled with LyX 1.4.x, not the version that comes with LyX/Win 1.3.x. I didn't intend any offense, it was Ruurd's work that made it possible for me to use lyx regularly in the first place, and I very much appreciate it. Just wanted to point out where I think the error message stems from. And that it seems to me that renaming "lyx2lyx" to "lyx2lyx.py" as was discussed before will not remedy the fact that the bundled-with-Ruurds-lyxwin python doesn't seem to handle it. btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, or will testing start later on? cheers, sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 16:58 schrieb Jose Capco: > I didn't understand your example, I was however able > to read the output lyx using the recent available > version , I'm not sure if it would be looking the same > had I lyx2lyxed it... it looks .. er not bad if I > don't don't use packages in my LaTeX. I wonder how to > go through newcommand stuffs in the preamble, putting > that in the preamble, I'll try to start all over and > write the preamble in lyx itself and not tex2lyx yet. If you have lyx2lyx working, you should be able to put everything into the preamble that you like. tex2lyx does not really touch the preamble, but it extracts certain packages that have builtin LyX support. > could you give me a tex you wrote and know that it > converts to lyx perfectly.. I need to know what to and > what not to put. Please do it the other way round: get your lyx2lyx woking, and then convert your document and tell us what does not work. Apart from certain tabular features (i. e. advanced column settings) and some advanced expert tex stuff everything should more or less work. If it does not, it may be easy to fix, but we need to know about it. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
ok great.. so I'll just wait until the 1.4.x comes up and the python er... anyway I'll just let 1.3.x import the 1.4.x lyxs which are still readable (but probably... Im not sure though, that after relyxing things would look better). and also, if the owner of this mailing list also reads this... could you please setup the listbot to send the emails so that when I hit the reply button it will send to the list rather than the individul users (I think that is possible, the listbot did an email redirection when I first subscribed to the list). Sincerely, Jose Capco --- Sven Schreiber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I didn't intend any offense, it was Ruurd's work > that made it possible > for me to use lyx regularly in the first place, and > I very much > appreciate it. Just wanted to point out where I > think the error message > stems from. And that it seems to me that renaming > "lyx2lyx" to > "lyx2lyx.py" as was discussed before will not remedy > the fact that the > bundled-with-Ruurds-lyxwin python doesn't seem to > handle it. --- snip > cheers, > sven > __ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
I'd love to be the guinea pig.. the boss cant write with LaTeX and this is the only way out. I'll send feedbacks. Jose Capco PS: I'll try experimenting on importing packages and using \newcommands on the preamble.. if anyone knows that this work then please advise. --- Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please do it the other way round: get your lyx2lyx > woking, and then > convert your document and tell us what does not > work. Apart from certain > tabular features (i. e. advanced column settings) > and some advanced > expert tex stuff everything should more or less > work. If it does not, it > may be easy to fix, but we need to know about it. > > > Georg > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: > btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In > fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What > I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, > or will testing start later on? Feedback is good. Apart from the obvious file name problem that Jose has had trouble with, there's a small bug in the latex parser that was corrected yesterday by Georg Baum. I've posted an updated version to http://www.devel.lyx.org/~leeming/tex2lyx_win32_02Feb05.zip but preliminary testings suggest that it is struggling with more file name problems. I'm out of town for a week or so as of Friday. I'd hope and expect things to be better by the time I return. -- Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Angus Leeming wrote: Sven Schreiber wrote: btw, another thing I very much appreciate is your tex2lyx snapshot. In fact I am using it right now to avoid my earlier relyx-problems. What I'm not sure about: Would you like users (like me) to give feedback now, or will testing start later on? Feedback is good. Apart from the obvious file name problem that Jose has had trouble with, there's a small bug in the latex parser that was corrected yesterday by Georg Baum. I've posted an updated version to http://www.devel.lyx.org/~leeming/tex2lyx_win32_02Feb05.zip but preliminary testings suggest that it is struggling with more file name problems. I'm out of town for a week or so as of Friday. I'd hope and expect things to be better by the time I return. Overall I'm quite impressed! But it still required some corrections afterwards, although I suspect some problems may be windows-specific (e.g. because of line-ending characters -- although I used an editor to try both unixish and windowsish settings without any difference!?). And I ended up using absolute paths everywhere for includegraphics as a simple workaround, because relative ones didn't work (tex2lyx complained "couldn't find"). Also remember that my comments apply to the whole tex2lyx->lyx2lyx->lyx1.3 trip, I cannot say where exactly things are happening. Some other things: - complains when \includegraphics* (starred variant) is used, while it could just be treated as the unstarred version (or am I missing something?) - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but it's also displayed as ERT - imports the \thanks-field inside the \title as ERT - has problems with my complicated \author-field (can't blame it too much, this includes minipages and graphics) - tables are fine! so much for that, thanks again for making it available -sven
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 19:03 schrieb Jose Capco: > and also, if the owner of this mailing list also reads > this... could you please setup the listbot to send the > emails so that when I hit the reply button it will > send to the list rather than the individul users (I > think that is possible, the listbot did an email > redirection when I first subscribed to the list). It is possible, but not wanted. Read http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html, and then get a decent email program (or news client, if you read the list via gmane). For example, I press L in kmail when I want to answer to the list. Georg
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Sven Schreiber wrote: Overall I'm quite impressed! But it still required some corrections afterwards, although I suspect some problems may be windows-specific (e.g. because of line-ending characters -- although I used an editor to try both unixish and windowsish settings without any difference!?). Georg has just committed another fix. Apparently a '\n' character became "\\n". I'll try and upload a new version. And I ended up using absolute paths everywhere for includegraphics as a simple workaround, because relative ones didn't work (tex2lyx complained "couldn't find"). Almost certainly this recently-introduced file horkage I've mentioned. Later, Angus
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Thanks, Angus, for your reply to my question. Meanwhile, I had the idea of installing LyX 1.4 cvs and getting tex2lyx. Afterwards, can I get back to LyX 1.3.5 and using tex2lyx without LyX 1.4? Does my idea make some sense? Paul
Re: tex2lyx for Linux
Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 20:37 schrieb Sven Schreiber: > - complains when \includegraphics* (starred variant) is used, while it > could just be treated as the unstarred version (or am I missing something?) \includegraphics* is equivalent to \includegraphics[clip]. I implemented \includegraphics* right now, it will appear in CVS soon. I guess that there are a lot of such simple things that are easy to implement (5 lines of code in this case), but that we simply need to be aware of. > - I use pdflatex but don't specify the .pdf-extension so that I can > switch to normal latex (using .eps) seamlessly; tex2lyx applies a > definite choice, thereby destroying this nice portability. Why? Because LyX 1.4 _always_ needs the extension: There is always one "master" version of the graphic that is referenced in the .lyx file. The others are created by the converter mechanism from the master file if needed. LyX will not output the extension in the .tex file to maintain portability, but it needs it in the .lyx file. Therefore tex2lyx looks for existing files and adds the extension if it finds one. What is missing here is a commandline switch for tex2lyx that tells wether the document is for "normal" latex or pdflatex. This should not be difficult to implement, you are welcome to do that if you know a bit of C++ ;-) > - I have a \bibliographystyle definition (with natbib), this seems to be > imported twice: it is specified when I open the bibreferences-inset, but > it's also displayed as ERT This is a known problem. It would be nice if you could add that to the wiki page. Georg
