Re: Empty staves not removed after one-bar percent repeat
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Peter Crighton <
petecrigh...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> % Empty staves are not removed after a percent repeat of one bar. Two or
> more
> bars work fine.
>
> \version "2.16.2"
>
> \paper { ragged-right = ##t }
>
> \layout {
> \context {
> \Staff
> \RemoveEmptyStaves
> }
> }
>
> \relative c' {
> \repeat unfold 4 { c1 }
> \break
> R1*4
> \break
> \repeat percent 4 { c1 }
> \break
> R1*4
> \break
> \repeat percent 2 { c1 c }
> \break
> R1*4
> }
>
>
Thanks, Peter Crighton. This has been submitted as issue 3321 :
https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3321
Ralph
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: [Spam??] Problem building doc section without built LilyPond
Urs Liska wrote Monday, April 15, 2013 5:07 PM >> I have the impression that (with my previous patch about .itely and >> .itexi files) doc-section.sh should work with both, and it should be >> possible to completely remove cg-section.sh (and of course update the >> doc). >> >> If you think that's true I could do that, make a patch and suggest it >> for inclusion. >> Otherwise I'd just add the necessary comments to complement my current >> (not-yet-sent) patch. >> >> Best >> Urs > OK, what the heck: > Here is a patch trying to fix the lilypond-book issue in doc-section.sh, > along with a comment in the CG. > If I have time I'll look into the other BUILD_DIRECTORY dependencies. > And if you can confirm my impression I would also make a patch removing > cg-section.sh and the reference in the CG. Urs, sorry for the late reply. I've got a chest infection which means I'm not feeling too bright at the moment. When I improve I'll try out the patch you attached. The main use of doc-section.sh is for Windows users who cannot easily build the docs, and at the moment I'm the only one doing that, I think, and I have my own local variant anyway. What I suggest is you make the changes you suggest and test them out under Linux, then pass them to me and I'll see if they work within the MinGW Bash shell under Windows (well, under Vista as that's all I have). Trevor ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: segfault with 2.17.12
Hello,
2013/4/3 Jan Nieuwenhuizen
> I made this typo
>
> \layout {
> music = { }
> { \music }
>
> and Lily segfaults on me.
>
Thank you for the report, this has been added as
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3323
Marek
bug squad member
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: [Spam??] Problem building doc section without built LilyPond
Am Mittwoch, den 17.04.2013, 17:34 +0100 schrieb Trevor Daniels: > Urs Liska wrote Monday, April 15, 2013 5:07 PM > > >> I have the impression that (with my previous patch about .itely and > >> .itexi files) doc-section.sh should work with both, and it should be > >> possible to completely remove cg-section.sh (and of course update the > >> doc). > >> > >> If you think that's true I could do that, make a patch and suggest it > >> for inclusion. > >> Otherwise I'd just add the necessary comments to complement my current > >> (not-yet-sent) patch. > >> > >> Best > >> Urs > > OK, what the heck: > > Here is a patch trying to fix the lilypond-book issue in doc-section.sh, > > along with a comment in the CG. > > If I have time I'll look into the other BUILD_DIRECTORY dependencies. > > And if you can confirm my impression I would also make a patch removing > > cg-section.sh and the reference in the CG. > > Urs, sorry for the late reply. I've got a chest infection which means I'm > not feeling too bright at the moment. When I improve I'll try out the > patch you attached. Hey, then "Gute Besserung" (no translation available ...) > > The main use of doc-section.sh is for Windows users who cannot easily > build the docs, and at the moment I'm the only one doing that, I think, > and I have my own local variant anyway. Well, it seems it is also practical for me. I'm feeling like getting slightly more involved than posting 'documentation suggestions' to bug-lilypond, but as this will for the time being only mean single changes to individual sections It doesn't seem necessary to set up building the whole documentation. > What I suggest is you make the > changes you suggest and test them out under Linux, then pass them to me > and I'll see if they work within the MinGW Bash shell under Windows > (well, under Vista as that's all I have). I made these changes to my local copy of the git repo, and it works so far (on Debian Linux). It isn't a 'professional' and once-and-for-all fix, but it improves the script in that it reduces the amount of cases the script will fail. And I didn't notice any side-effects. If you look into it please also consider the cg-section.sh issue I mentioned. If you confirm my impression/opinion I'd be glad to enhance my patch and remove that script and update the documentation accordingly (you see, I'm eager to supply my first substantial patch (my previous and very first patch was a totally neglectable typo in a translation). Best Urs > > Trevor ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: cross staff notes collide
Hello, 2013/4/9 Evan Laforge > > When note heads cross to the upper staff, they should cause the upper > notes to flip stem directions to avoid collision. > Thank you for the report, this has been added as http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3324 Marek bug squad member ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Misplaced tie
In the chords below, the tie between the g's is misplaced when the
direction is chosen automatically, but is correct when the direction
is manually specified.
\version "2.17.15"
\relative c' {
% The tie between the g's is misplaced
~
% Manually forcing ties up or down or adding another note gives a correct
placement
^~
_~
~
}
See also http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=962
and http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=904
and http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=141
Trevor
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
