> Is it possible to run 2 versions of lilypond with some degree of ease? I
> have
> plenty of mhz, diskspace, and memory (512M). What I lack is savvy and
> time. I
> have too much stuff to do to stay on the bleeding edge--I think--maybe.
Certainly! I don't install Lilypond in /usr/local/, instead
I just set a link ~/lilypond/ to the version I want to use.
I have set the different path variables in the login file
to point to the subdirectories of ~/lilypond/.
> I noticed that in the faq you give ways of putting two pieces in one
> file or
> page but there is no mention of the possibility of simply doing two
> score
> blocks, if one doesn't want another header. Will that still work in
> newer
> versions than 1.2.17?
You could have any number of score blocks in a single file.
If you want a separate dvi file with headers for each score,
use the flag -s to ly2dvi. If you just want the music without
any header, don't use ly2dvi but run lilypond directly.
It will output one .tex file for each score block, which
you could process with tex (not latex).
> I found that I could get 11 (single part) scores-blocks on one page with
> the
> default linespacing, but I have not been able to number them (Ex.1.2
> etc.) in
> the indent which you provide.:-) When I have no header block, dvips
> takes the
> vertical space anyway. Surely if there is no title, etc., the music
> should not
> start so far down the page. Lilypond apparently won't make a valid .ps
> file if
> there is no header. I understand the philosophy as it relates to music
> creation, but what does the header have to do with that?
See above. The job of ly2dvi is to first call lilypond and then
add the header, if you don't want the header or want some other
page layout, call lilypond directly and process the result
using tex or include the resulting .tex files in your own
latex file.
I don't understand your question on the numbering.
> If there is a rest in my chord part the spacing is bad. (There are no
> lyrics.)
> It is customary to reiterate a chord name on a new line of music, but
> not
> otherwise. There is no solution to my particular problem, because if I
> use a
> rest there are two staves and there is no chord on the new line, and if
> I
> reiterate the chord instead of using a rest there are three staves and
> no new
> line at the tie so I have a needlessly duplicated chord name. I can
> stand it,
> but it is not good.
Could you send an example which illustrates the problem.
> I found "volta 2" confusing until I realized that you mean "turn twice"
> (verb) rather than "two turns" (noun). Why not "volte 2", since you
> never have
> just one? Why have it at all, since you have \repeat? :-)
since you can also do \repeat unfold 5 to print out the
same music 5 times (e.g. in the left hand of a Haydn
piano piece). There's also a fold variant and I've
promised to implement a version that prints %-like
symbols for each repeated bar.
/Mats
