Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"Main file directory" should be relative to the bib file #1324

Closed
vogler opened this issue Apr 29, 2016 · 8 comments
Closed

"Main file directory" should be relative to the bib file #1324

vogler opened this issue Apr 29, 2016 · 8 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Confirmed bugs or reports that are very likely to be bugs
Milestone

Comments

@vogler
Copy link

vogler commented Apr 29, 2016

If I set "Preferences > File> Main file directory" to "lit", then the default "Link" after "Look up full text document" will be "/Applications/JabRef.app/Contents/java/app/lit/some.pdf" instead of "/path/to/bib/lit/some.pdf"

Version 3.3

@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

I can not really reproduce this in the current master: 1aa2145
Please try again with v3.3 or the latest development snapshot from http://builds.jabref.org/master/

My settings are as follows:

  1. Open bib databse e.g . \JabRef\Data\myBibs\test.bib
  2. Set Main file directory to "lit" (so the relative path is myBibs\lit )
  3. Check "Allow file links relative to bib" <- Maybe you did not check that?
  4. Auto ink files with names starting with bibtex keys
  5. Select an entry in the database -> File -> Auto

And now the file is attached using its relative path:
jabrefrelativefilepath

@vogler
Copy link
Author

vogler commented Apr 29, 2016

Same settings, same behavior with the current snapshot.
Linking files works. The only problem is that the path-prefix in the "Look up full text document" dialog is set to wherever the jar-file is, instead of where the bib-file is. E.g. now it is "/Users/voglerr/Downloads/lit/foo.pdf" instead of "/Users/voglerr/paper/lit/foo.pdf".

@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

@vogler Ah yes. Now I understand what you mean. You are referring to the Quality-> Lookup fulltext document dialog.
Yes, I could reproduce that behavior. I will look into that. I think I know where to look.

Could someone add bug label and assign it to me?

@matthiasgeiger matthiasgeiger added the bug Confirmed bugs or reports that are very likely to be bugs label Apr 29, 2016
@JabFabi
Copy link

JabFabi commented May 24, 2016

Hi, I'm not sure if this is related to the issue you are working on, but as you mentioned the option "Allow file links relative to bib":
I would like to enable this option (as I had in an older version) but whenever I do so, it gets reset to the disabled state after restarting JabRef 3.3.
I had a look into the exported settings XML file and compared it to the old one; the corresponding entry is simply missing and it seems to be missing in the Windows registry as well. Also, I didn't find any entry for this option in the "View settings" dialog.
Let me know if you need further details.

Greetings and thanks for the great job!
Fabi

@stefan-kolb
Copy link
Member

@JabFabi Please open a new issue for this behavior.

@stefan-kolb stefan-kolb added this to the v3.6 milestone Jul 26, 2016
@koppor
Copy link
Member

koppor commented Aug 9, 2016

@vogler Work around: Set the relative directory for each bibtex database. Please report if that works for you.

grabbed_20160809-201655

@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

@koppor This issue is fixed in #1336 (Working directoy)

@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

@vogler Fixed. Please try out the latest dev build from:
http://builds.jabref.org/master/

ayanai1 pushed a commit to ayanai1/jabref that referenced this issue Sep 5, 2016
Refactored Open and Save dialogs
Introduced FileExtensions enum for FileDialog Filter
Updated BrowseAction to use new dialogs
Fix JabRef#1324 
Fix JabRef#1609
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Confirmed bugs or reports that are very likely to be bugs
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants