> On 17 Mar 2022, at 23:39, Hans Aikema <hans.aik...@aikebah.net> wrote: > > >> On 17 Mar 2022, at 23:18, Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On 17 Mar 2022, at 23:06, Hans Aikema <hans.aik...@aikebah.net> wrote: >>> >>> I also prefer to run development releases alongside stable, but any music I >>> try to write for stable (unless there is something I neer for it that only >>> works in the development version). Development I only run from time >>> to time to see that nothing I use is breaking on it. >> >> In the past I used support for irregular meters and microtonality with >> support slowly coming along in the development version, but that has now >> moved to the stable version. Unfortunately, one cannot install both the >> development version and the stable one side by side in the standard >> MacPorts, I think, because they have the same name, unless one makes a >> separate installation of MacPorts in a different location than /opt/local/, >> which is also possible. > > You cannot have both active indeed, but you can install them both (one > active, one inactive). The recipe to end up with stable, but have current > development version at hand for activation: > > sudo port install lilypond-devel > sudo port deactivate lilypond-devel > sudo port install lilypond > > then when you want to try develop: > sudo port deactivate lilypond > sudo port activate lilypond-devel > > and the other way around to switch back to stable: > sudo port deactivate lilypond-devel > sudo port activate lilypond
This seems simpler than having a separate MacPorts installation. —To avoid having to write 'sudo' all the time, one can start 'sudo -s'. > only the active one will be upgraded with a sudo port upgrade outdated (over > time you can even have multiple historical versions side by side at hand for > activation by specifying the explicit version) This is something that should be remembered.
