lyx2lyx regression? Malformed LyX document after roundtrip

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 09:40:36PM +0200, Günter Milde wrote:
> On 15.09.20, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 05:53:56PM +0200, Günter Milde wrote:
> > > On 13.09.20, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 04:53:15PM +0200, Kornel Benko wrote:
> > > > > Am Sun, 13 Sep 2020 10:33:20 -0400
> > > > > schrieb Scott Kostyshak <skostysh at lyx.org>:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 11:43:31AM +0100, José Abílio Matos wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sunday, September 13, 2020 5:42:55 AM WEST Scott Kostyshak wrote:  
> > > > > > > > On current master I get the following:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > $ lyx -e lyx20x Beamer.lyx && lyx Beamer.20.lyx
> > > > > > > > Warning: Malformed LyX document: Missing layout name on line 1876
> > > > > > > > Warning: Malformed LyX document: Missing layout name on line 3053
> > > > > > > > Warning: Malformed LyX document: Missing layout name on line 4716
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > The reason this might be a regression is that if I first export to 2.3.x
> > > > > > > > format, and then in 2.3.0 I do the roundtrip with 2.0.x format, I do not
> > > > > > > > get those warnings:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > $ lyx -e lyx23x Beamer.lyx
> > > > > > > > $ lyx230 -e lyx20x Beamer.23.lyx && lyx230 Beamer.23.20.lyx  
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > First the general consideration:
> > > > > > > LyX 2.1 was the version where Jürgen's overhaul of the beamer layout was 
> > > > > > > implemented. I like and I prefer it to the previous version but this change 
> > > > > > > implied a significant change from the previous layout.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The conversion from lyx 2.0 format (from a beamer layout) to 2.1 is a tricky 
> > > > > > > issue. The reversion is even more difficult and is done on a best effort 
> > > > > > > basis.
> > > > > > > The round trip for a beamer layout, 2.1 -> 2.0 -> 2.1 is useless in practical 
> > > > > > > terms.  
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Sounds like this test is a good candidate to be inverted (i.e., tell the
> > > > > > tests we expect it to fail). It might not be worth the time to investigate.
> > > > > 
> > > > > +1
> > > 
> > > > I did a bisect and the "Malformed LyX document" messages begin starting
> > > > with a151b274. Günter, can you reproduce? To reproduce, just open the
> > > > attached file on master.
> > > 
> > > I can reproduce.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > It's possible that there was a problem before but it's just that the
> > > > message "Malformed LyX document" was not emitted. Günter, do you know if
> > > > that's the case? If so, we should just invert this test and forget about
> > > > it.
> > > 
> > > I can't see a missing layout on the given lines in the file you sent.
> > > 
> > > OTOH, it contains 60 lines with "\begin_layout " and no name!
> > > I don't know whether this is a bug or a feature, though.
> 
> > Sounds good. Let's just forget about this issue and invert the test? I
> > have the feeling it's not worth the time.
> 
> Agreed.

I'll invert the two tests.

Scott
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lyx.org/pipermail/lyx-devel/attachments/20200915/0df22f9c/attachment.asc>