More layout problems
Check the output of the following:
test = { c-1-^ r f-2-^ r c-3-^ r f-4-^ r c-1-^ r f-2-^ r c-3-^ r }
\score {
\repeat unfold 8 { \test \test r
\transpose c c''' \test \transpose c c''' \test r }
\layout { ragged-bottom = ##t }
}
It is clear that on the first page, the \layout parameter ragged-bottom
is ignored (or the first page would have, well, a ragged bottom and a
vertical spacing similar to the packed last page).
It is also clear on the second page that the vertical spacing is going
overboard in compressing the page, partly intermingling the systems.
Since it does not make sense to compress only the last page like that,
the vertical spacing should, when ragged-bottom is not ##t (to get a
valid regression test independent from the first problem, remove the
layout line), not compress the resulting page beyond its page-breaking
estimate, in order to get output spacing consistent with the layout of
the previous pages.
--
David Kastrup
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: More layout problems
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message
news:87mxqvcsvr@lola.goethe.zz...
Check the output of the following:
test = { c-1-^ r f-2-^ r c-3-^ r f-4-^ r c-1-^ r f-2-^ r c-3-^ r }
\score {
\repeat unfold 8 { \test \test r
\transpose c c''' \test \transpose c c''' \test r }
\layout { ragged-bottom = ##t }
}
It is clear that on the first page, the \layout parameter ragged-bottom
is ignored (or the first page would have, well, a ragged bottom and a
vertical spacing similar to the packed last page).
It is also clear on the second page that the vertical spacing is going
overboard in compressing the page, partly intermingling the systems.
Since it does not make sense to compress only the last page like that,
the vertical spacing should, when ragged-bottom is not ##t (to get a
valid regression test independent from the first problem, remove the
layout line), not compress the resulting page beyond its page-breaking
estimate, in order to get output spacing consistent with the layout of
the previous pages.
--
David Kastrup
David,
It would seem that there are a number of spacing issues with 2.13.35 and as
a result I opened http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1285.
Joe has responded to that to say that he's reverted the git code to the
2.13.34 behaviour. Will this fix your issues? If so, we don't need to
worry further. If not, it would be helpful to produce a summary of the
issue and test material so that a further issue can be raised.
--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: More layout problems
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes:
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message
news:87mxqvcsvr@lola.goethe.zz...
Check the output of the following:
test = { c-1-^ r f-2-^ r c-3-^ r f-4-^ r c-1-^ r f-2-^ r c-3-^ r }
\score {
\repeat unfold 8 { \test \test r
\transpose c c''' \test \transpose c c''' \test r }
\layout { ragged-bottom = ##t }
}
It is clear that on the first page, the \layout parameter ragged-bottom
is ignored (or the first page would have, well, a ragged bottom and a
vertical spacing similar to the packed last page).
It is also clear on the second page that the vertical spacing is going
overboard in compressing the page, partly intermingling the systems.
Since it does not make sense to compress only the last page like that,
the vertical spacing should, when ragged-bottom is not ##t (to get a
valid regression test independent from the first problem, remove the
layout line), not compress the resulting page beyond its page-breaking
estimate, in order to get output spacing consistent with the layout of
the previous pages.
--
David Kastrup
David,
It would seem that there are a number of spacing issues with 2.13.35
and as a result I opened
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1285. Joe has
responded to that to say that he's reverted the git code to the
2.13.34 behaviour. Will this fix your issues?
Uh, the above test case _is_ for the current git version.
If so, we don't need to worry further. If not, it would be helpful to
produce a summary of the issue and test material so that a further
issue can be raised.
What is wrong with the above?
--
David Kastrup
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: More layout problems
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:8762xjcltg@lola.goethe.zz... Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes: David, It would seem that there are a number of spacing issues with 2.13.35 and as a result I opened http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1285. Joe has responded to that to say that he's reverted the git code to the 2.13.34 behaviour. Will this fix your issues? Uh, the above test case _is_ for the current git version. I can't raise it as a bug yet then. If so, we don't need to worry further. If not, it would be helpful to produce a summary of the issue and test material so that a further issue can be raised. What is wrong with the above? Nothing. It's just that it's one of many you've posted, and I wanted to know which you felt best illustrated the issue. -- Phil Holmes Bug Squad ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: More layout problems
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote in message news:8762xjcltg@lola.goethe.zz... What is wrong with the above? Nothing. It's just that it's one of many you've posted, and I wanted to know which you felt best illustrated the issue. There is more than one issue. When I post a different description, it is likely a different issue. Should bugs in the current git version (not yet released) be raised only on lilypond-devel? If you say that you can't register a bug for an unregistered version, that would seem like the sanest course. -- David Kastrup ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: More layout problems
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 6:15 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: There is more than one issue. When I post a different description, it is likely a different issue. Should bugs in the current git version (not yet released) be raised only on lilypond-devel? If you say that you can't register a bug for an unregistered version, that would seem like the sanest course. Yes please. We cannot expect our Bug Squad to be able to compile git (or even to know what git is), so this list should only be used for problems in officially-released GUB versions. Cheers, - Graham ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
