The default citation capability of LaTeX is not a true numerical
citation engine, rather it uses a mixture of labels/numbers. Thus
we now distinguish them: "numerical" always increments the bibitem
counter and uses its value as a numerical citation label, while
"default" only uses the bibitem counter when no label is provided.
LyX file format incremented to 471.
1.) Do not include layout tests on MAC, since the
linker-option which allows multiple definitions is
no longer supported.
2.) Indenting made consistent
I see lot of errors like:
The following string was expected to be '.cpp' or '.h':
LyX.cpp: In member function 'void lyx::LyX::printError(const lyx::ErrorItem&)':
Warning: the error was not parsed correctly.
The following string was expected to be '.cpp' or '.h':
LyX.cpp: In function 'void lyx::error_handler(int)':
These should be used if any new style needs to be introduced in the stable
2.1 series: If the ForceLocal flag of the style is set, it will always be
written to the document header, so that even older 2.1 versions can read
and correctly output the document.
If you have an unmounted dir, ac_dir, in your PATH, the call to
os.path.isfile( os.path.join(ac_dir, ac_word + ext) )
hangs. This is probably a python bug, but the result of configure.py
hanging and LyX freezing is really bad, hence this workaround.
According to the python docs, MacOS doesn't provide os.access();
the hasattr protection is used for this reason.
When running the test, you'll get the following messages:
Testing ../../src/../lib/layouts/siamltex.layout...
Layout.cpp (268): Cannot copy unknown style `Enumerate'
Testing ../../src/../lib/layouts/svglobal.layout...
Cannot delete style `Dedication'
Testing ../../src/../lib/layouts/svjog.layout...
Cannot delete style `Dedication'
Testing ../../src/../lib/layouts/svprobth.layout...
Cannot delete style `Dedication'
These are no errors of Layout::write(), but they indicate problems in the
definition of the layout files.
Kornel, it would be nice if you could do the cmake part.
I was confused when I checked this. It looks like plainnat.bst
overwrites this default to use [Ref1, Ref2] style instead, but
when using natbib's defaults you get the (Ref1; Ref2) style.
