@Wildcard if you want WYSIWYG TeX, use lyx. From the debian package description:
LyX is an almost WYSIWYG-frontend for LaTeX. It makes the power and typesetting quality of LaTeX available for people who are used to word processors. Since LyX supports LaTeX's concept of general mark-ups, it is even easier and faster to create professional quality documents with it than with usual word processors. It is also possible to use LaTeX commands within LyX, so nothing of LaTeX's power is lost.
BTW, I used lyx briefly a long time ago. I found it wasn't worth giving up vi for, especially since I can achieve a similar affect with PDF output - several pdf viewers will automatically reload the document if it changes, so just re-generate the PDF to see an updated view. works especially nicely with two monitors, one for editing and compiling latex, and one for a pdf viewer (I have a 24" 1440p monitor pivoted to portrait mode just for viewing things like this)
@Wildcard It's inaccurate to say "more than it is". TeX's lack of WYSIWYG isn't a defect, it's a feature. Doing stuff manually is fine, but it doesn't lend itself to automation, and is also inherently very imprecise.
It's true that TeX's approach can be more labor/time-intensive than a word processor approach. I use it for PDF annotation, for example, and it takes way too much time. But the alternatives aren't great either.
@cas Personally LyX doesn't do much for me. It feels like a crutch. But some people seem to like it.
@FaheemMitha meh, okay. I think I'm done discussing it. It has a lack which I wish it didn't have, even if you call it a feature. I can understand the trade offs. Visual arrangement is not inherently imprecise, though.
3 hours later…
user141350
10:30 AM
Terdon and Steffen Kitt might find this SE meta session interesting and helpful:
@JohnDoea I think you probably meant "Stephen" Kitt, not "Steffen" (just look at his profile for how it's spelled, if you're not sure). In regards to your "masking a mdoe" question, do you intend to further edit it? I see your flag asking for it to be unlocked.
nothing also that the post has five answers, one of them accepted, so changing the question now has the potential to invalidate one or more of those answers.
user141350
1:48 PM
Hello Jeff,
I am sorry; Stephen*.
Jeff, I don't plan to edit the question but I think the question should be opened after the disputes were solved...
> Dale Carnegie said, “A person’s name is to that person, the sweetest, most important sound in any language.” Remembering names of customers, prospects, networking contacts, and colleagues is critical to your ongoing professional success. It is essential in forming and strengthening relationships as well as establishing rapport with individuals and feeling confident doing so.
@JohnDoea I'm not sure what to do here. If it doesn't need any more edits, is there a problem with it being locked? If it has an accepted answer, does it need to be reopened for more answers?
user141350
4:22 PM
I think in principle it shouldn't be; whatever any mod chooses is fine with me.
@Kusalananda: I believe you can monitor the status of jenkins jobs through another interface so it seems almost certain that the OP in that question does in fact want the jobs to execute in the background.
I know here we have a webhook where the jenkins progress gets announced in our chat channel
or even thepids+=([$somescript]="$!") if they want to be able to recall the pid by job name (assuming there are different scripts for each job or some sort of identifier for the job)
Id don't think it's neccesary to store the name of the command (unless they want to do it for reporting purposes). The end of their script could be a loop over wait -n that waits for the next background job to finish, and then "tick them off" one by one as they do so. If one fails, kill em all!
Oh, there's no way to know what job exited with wait -n...
The issue is that you can easily wait with wait -n for the next job to finish, but if it exits with a failure, you must blindly kill all known PIDs. That's not safe to do.
@derobert this was working before... but now it is failing...
Get:21 download.docker.com/linux/debian stretch/stable amd64 docker-ce amd64 5:19.03.4~3-0~debian-stretch [22.8 MB]
Fetched 54.6 MB in 1min 8s (794 kB/s)
E: Failed to fetch download.docker.com/linux/debian/dists/stretch/pool/stable/… transfer closed with 30852358 bytes remaining to read
E: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe run apt-get update or try with --fix-missing?
You've selected Docker versions based on what's available on your build host, not what's available inside the container image you're building. The jenkins:lts image is based on Debian Stretch, not Ubuntu Bionic.
Dockerfiles are actually just running fairly ordinary Docker operations. So, for ex...
you suggested me to debug but docker run -it image_id bash does not provide output of apt-cache madison docker-ce
Ithe version am downloading is:ARG DOCKER_VERSION=5:19.03.4~3-0~debian-stretch
Trying to download version(5:19.03.4~3-0~debian-stretch) of docker-ce using dockerfile:
# apt-cache madison docker-ce
docker-ce | 5:19.03.4~3-0~debian-stretch | https://download.docker.com/linux/debian stretch/stable amd64 Packages
docker-ce | 5:19.03.3~3-0~debian-stretch | https://download.do...
