Peekay Ex <pkx1...@gmail.com> writes: > Hello, > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Graham Percival > <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 06:22:55PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Graham Percival" >>> <gra...@percival-music.ca> >>> >On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:17:50AM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: >>> >>I'd like to add a note to this effect in the CG - anyone object? >>> > >>> >yes; I'd rather see an issue in the tracker instead. >>> >>> Can I suggest that this is rather overkill for an update to the CG? >>> I'd not disagree at all over notation ref, or code, but the CG isn't >>> supposed to be finely crafted words, it's supposed to be a quick >>> source of reference for contributors. You'll note that I thought >>> pushing directly to it was OK when I added stuff about regtest >>> comparisons. I think this is the same. >> >> oh, sorry, I was unclear. I don't want to see this bug documented >> in the CG; I want to see this bug fixed. It's going to be a 1-3 >> line fix to some build file. I'm optimistic that this can be >> achieved within a week. As such, I don't want an extra note in >> the CG that we'll have to remove in a few days. >> >> Cheers, >> - Graham >> > > if it is of any use, the last 3 patches I have just tested for David, > none gave me make failures at all. I even did two of them again twice, > just to see if it was a fluke. So it seems to be the 'type' of files > that get patched perhaps that generate this oddity? > > Reitveld issues 5023044, 5090045, 5083045.
All of my patches tend to touch lily/parser.yy and lily/lexer.ll and not much else. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
