[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lyx-devel
Subject:    Re: [patch] Cygwin polishing
From:       Enrico Forestieri <forenr () tlc ! unipr ! it>
Date:       2006-03-31 22:06:54
Message-ID: 20060331220654.GB21173 () sirio ! sssup ! it
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 08:05:10PM +0200, Michael Gerz wrote:

> Just my two cents:
> 
> I agree with Jean-Marc that we should keep things simple. We don't have 
> to support each and every conceivable configuration. If we manage to 
> provide the Windows world with a working LyX - no matter how - our job 
> is done!

Michael, the point is that I think a cygwin version of LyX is potentially
better than a native version. This is my opinion and I do not want to
convince anybody of it. You should understand that there may be someone
who doesn't like what you like and viceversa ;-)

I compile it for myself and I think I am not leaking any resource from
the native version. I also hope to not be a stumbling stone.

>  I also don't understand why a user may want to change path 
> conventions at run-time (is there anybody out there who actually 
> understands the implications?)

It is not like that. You simply decide that you like the win-style
for paths and check a button in preferences, so it is as if you have
the native version. Or you could prefer a posix appearance. But you
do this once, not every minute.

There is no implication, as the LyX sources already deal with both
pseudo-win style and posix style. It is like having a chameleon.
The way I designed things, the conversions are always consistent and
till now I neither noticed problems, nor can I foresee them. If I have
a problem using win-style paths, the same problem will show up in the
native version. If I have a problem with posix style, the same problem
will show up in the *nix version.

However, as cygwin runs on Windows, the win-style is more advantageous,
because you can use both native and cygwin apps. Using the native
version you are somewhat more limited. I use cygwin and have many cygwin
applications, so I do not want to have duplicates for using LyX.
Heck, I was even using cygwin for compiling a native version!

I was able to use cygwin and native LyX together, but it seems that
many people have trouble. So, I think that a cygwin version is good
for them.

> This said, I am happy with any patches that fix cygwin problems. 
> However, we should make sure that MinGW and MikTeX continue to work 
> without special hacks.

Agreed.

-- 
Enrico
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]