Yes, definitely a regression. I've gone back to using 2.11.34 which does not suffer this bug, as most of my documentation work is fiddling with tiny snippets, and a 1 minute delay every time I make a change makes it impossible to work.
Trevor > -----Original Message----- > From: Mats Bengtsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 11 March 2008 10:29 > To: Valentin Villenave > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bug-Lilypond > Subject: Re: Slow compile on Windows XP - font > caching problem? > > > > > Valentin Villenave wrote: > > 2008/3/10, Trevor Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > >> Under 2.11.42 the fonts are cached in C:\Documents and > >> Settings\[username]\.lilypond-fonts.cache-2. > This also > >> contains 2 small and one large (682 KB) > files, but when > >> LilyPond compiles it changes just the large > file - every > >> time. This is pretty certainly where the > extra time is > >> going, as the time stamp on this file updates > around 45 secs > >> after starting the compile. > >> > >> This may well be the same as the Vista > slowness problem > >> which was also related to font caching. > >> > > > > Yes, I encountered the same problem on XP; it > seems to re-calculate > > the font cache on every compilation, and > therefore takes ages to > > compile anything. However, I didn't report it > since I assumed I was > > doing something wrong. > > > If this problem has appeared also on XP, then > it's a regression bug. > > /Mats > _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
