Interesting, the brew formula uses the pre-built binaries which are 32- bit only (due to licensing issues, see below): https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-cask/blob/HEAD/Casks/lilypond.rb That's more of a packaging issue in brew, LilyPond should build fine with Clang since a year or so. IMHO the formula should be updated to build from source.
For the pre-built binaries, you could have a look at my ideas in this repo: https://github.com/hahnjo/lilypond-binaries/ I think I eventually made it work for macOS, but I don't own a Mac myself so help would be welcome. I presented the idea earlier this year, see this thread: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2020-03/msg00337.html Note that this way requires Guile 2.2 (to also get 64-bit binaries for Windows) which is not yet ready for full production use, I'd say. Regards Jonas Am Donnerstag, dem 31.12.2020 um 19:37 +0000 schrieb Juan Lucas Rey: > Hi thanks for the swift response on New year's Eve no less. > > I am referring at the problem installing from brew, or even the fact that the > instructions for using terminal lily pond should be updated to reflect the > fact that zsh is the new default terminal (I think the tutorial assumes bash) > > But mainly the issue would be lilypond not working with brew out of the box > > > On 31 Dec 2020, at 15:51, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > > > Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanw...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 4:05 PM Juan Lucas Rey <juanlucas...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello > > > > > > > > I am currently an Engineer working regularly with C++17 at Bloomberg, > > > > and > > > > would like to be a contributor to lilypond. In particular I would like > > > > to > > > > take as first objective to make it compatible with 64 bit compilation. > > > > > > > > Is this an objective that is desirable by the rest of the team? Was it > > > > attempted before? > > > > > > > > > I think LilyPond already works well on 64-bit architectures. (I'm using it > > > on a x86_64 laptop currently). What makes you think it needs more > > > work? > > > > His headers show "X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)" so this is > > likely a guess regarding the lack of availability of a 64-bit MacOSX > > version from the main site. > > > > Unfortunately, that's rather an Apple licensing issue. Addressing it > > would likely require moving the MacOSX compilation environment on GUB > > <https://lilypond.org/gub> from Apple's proprietary SDKs (which don't > > have anything allowing cross-compilation for 64bit systems) to a form of > > free Darwin-only. Certainly a worthwhile goal but probably quite > > different from what the OP thinks the problem is here. > > > > -- > > David Kastrup >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
