RE: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Gail Rein]

Steven, could you please share the steps you did to set up running LilyPond
in a Docker container on your Mac? I really want to try this as I a solution
for using LilyPond on macOS Catalina 10.51.1. I don't have any experience
using or setting up Docker containers.
Thanks,
Gail



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Hans Åberg]

> On 7 Mar 2019, at 20:24, Mason Hock  wrote:
> 
> I'm not familiar with Stockfish and am not sure what
> their situation is.

If one has the sources, they can be modified, and using Xcode, compiled, and 
the binary can be installed on a device connected to the computer without using 
the app store, cf. [1], "Install using Xcode".

1. https://docs.monaca.io/en/products_guide/monaca_ide/deploy/non_market_deploy/



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Mason Hock]

On 03/07, Karlin High wrote:
> Okay, probably not. Apple and GPL-maker the Free Software Foundation seem
> pretty uninterested in each other's goals.
> 
> 
> 
> 

My message to the list yesterday seems to have not gone through, but
here's my (IANAL) understanding of the situation:

Unless Apple has changed its policy, the App Store terms of use impose
restrictions beyond that of the software's license, which violates any
version of the GPL, even with the source code. Moreover, iOS does not
allow the user to install unsigned software, so even if the user can
modify the software they can not run it in iOS. GPLv2 allows this, but
the loophole was closed in GPLv3. In order to legally distribute
GPL-licensed software through the App Store, all contributors (unless
they have signed a CLA) must agree to relicense the iOS version of the
software or make an exception to the license. Nextcloud is an example of
the latter.[1] I'm not familiar with Stockfish and am not sure what
their situation is.

See also.[2]

[1] https://github.com/nextcloud/ios/blob/master/COPYING.iOS
[2] https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store-gpl-enforcement


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Hans Åberg]

> On 7 Mar 2019, at 15:01, Karlin High  wrote:
> 
> On 3/7/2019 7:44 AM, Karlin High wrote:
>> Think it's worth reaching out to that project to find out?
> 
> Okay, probably not. Apple and GPL-maker the Free Software Foundation seem 
> pretty uninterested in each other's goals.
> 
> 
> 
> 

If one has the sources, maybe one can compile it in Xcode and install it from 
there.



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Karlin High]

On 3/7/2019 7:44 AM, Karlin High wrote:

Think it's worth reaching out to that project to find out?


Okay, probably not. Apple and GPL-maker the Free Software Foundation 
seem pretty uninterested in each other's goals.






--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Karlin High]

On 3/6/2019 5:34 PM, Hans Åberg wrote:

Isn't it enough to distribute the sources along with the app, as with Stockfish
https://stockfishchess.org/download/


That DOES look like a GPL v3 project getting distributed on Apple App Store.



I wonder how that's allowed. David K? Anyone? Think it's worth reaching 
out to that project to find out?

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Hans Åberg]

> On 6 Mar 2019, at 04:20, Austin Blaser  wrote:
> 
> Regarding the iOS App Store: Oh yeah I forgot about the licensing: definitely 
> a potential deal breaker.

Isn't it enough to distribute the sources along with the app, as with Stockfish
https://stockfishchess.org/download/



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

RE: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Steven Weber]

If you wanted to avoid having an external server, you could always use Docker.  
I’ve been running LP in a Docker container on my mac for a couple of months 
now, and it’s worked flawlessly.

--Steven

From: lilypond-user  On 
Behalf Of Austin Blaser
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 7:20 PM
To: Karlin High 
Cc: Mason Hock ; lilypond-user ; 
Carl Sorensen 
Subject: Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

Regarding the iOS App Store: Oh yeah I forgot about the licensing: definitely a 
potential deal breaker. One other possibility I’ve thought about is building an 
iOS app that would have all the text editing capability one would need, but 
then send the .ly files to a backend server to typeset with LilyPond and return 
the PDFs, similar to how Lilybin.com<http://Lilybin.com> operates. That way the 
app itself doesn’t have LilyPond in it and gets around the licensing issue. 
Would that be of interest? I’ve wanted to use an iPad at the piano for a long 
time.

Thanks for your input…I’ll keep everyone posted!


On Mar 5, 2019, at 7:46 PM, Karlin High 
mailto:karlinh...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019, 8:02 PM Austin Blaser 
mailto:austin.bla...@icloud.com>> wrote:
I’d like to make an attempt at compiling Llilypond on the Mac.

That sounds like an interesting project. If it turns out to not be very hard, 
it might influence software distribution choices for LilyPond.

I’m an iOS developer, so I’m also interested to see if we can compile it to run 
natively for iOS as well. Compiling for OSX is a good first step to getting it 
running on iOS.

I am thinking LilyPond is GNU GPL software, Apple App Store doesn't accept that 
license, and the App Store is the only good way to get software onto iOS 
devices. Are there other possibilities I'm missing?

Who would be the best contact to help with any trouble-shooting for this build?

Probably the lilypond-devel list.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Austin Blaser]

Regarding the iOS App Store: Oh yeah I forgot about the licensing: definitely a 
potential deal breaker. One other possibility I’ve thought about is building an 
iOS app that would have all the text editing capability one would need, but 
then send the .ly files to a backend server to typeset with LilyPond and return 
the PDFs, similar to how Lilybin.com operates. That way the app itself doesn’t 
have LilyPond in it and gets around the licensing issue. Would that be of 
interest? I’ve wanted to use an iPad at the piano for a long time.

Thanks for your input…I’ll keep everyone posted!

> On Mar 5, 2019, at 7:46 PM, Karlin High  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019, 8:02 PM Austin Blaser  > wrote:
> I’d like to make an attempt at compiling Llilypond on the Mac.
> 
> That sounds like an interesting project. If it turns out to not be very hard, 
> it might influence software distribution choices for LilyPond. 
> 
> I’m an iOS developer, so I’m also interested to see if we can compile it to 
> run natively for iOS as well. Compiling for OSX is a good first step to 
> getting it running on iOS.
> 
> I am thinking LilyPond is GNU GPL software, Apple App Store doesn't accept 
> that license, and the App Store is the only good way to get software onto iOS 
> devices. Are there other possibilities I'm missing? 
> 
> Who would be the best contact to help with any trouble-shooting for this 
> build?
> 
> Probably the lilypond-devel list. 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Karlin High]

On Tue, Mar 5, 2019, 8:02 PM Austin Blaser  wrote:

> I’d like to make an attempt at compiling Llilypond on the Mac.


That sounds like an interesting project. If it turns out to not be very
hard, it might influence software distribution choices for LilyPond.

I’m an iOS developer, so I’m also interested to see if we can compile it to
> run natively for iOS as well. Compiling for OSX is a good first step to
> getting it running on iOS.
>

I am thinking LilyPond is GNU GPL software, Apple App Store doesn't accept
that license, and the App Store is the only good way to get software onto
iOS devices. Are there other possibilities I'm missing?

Who would be the best contact to help with any trouble-shooting for this
> build?
>

Probably the lilypond-devel list.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Austin Blaser]

I’d like to make an attempt at compiling Llilypond on the Mac. I’m an iOS 
developer, so I’m also interested to see if we can compile it to run natively 
for iOS as well. Compiling for OSX is a good first step to getting it running 
on iOS.

Who would be the best contact to help with any trouble-shooting for this build?

Regards,

Austin Blaser
> On Mar 5, 2019, at 9:28 AM, Carl Sorensen  wrote:
> 
> On 3/4/19, 10:20 PM, "Mason Hock"  wrote:
> 
>On 03/02, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> We cannot use our regular build system to create LilyPond binaries due to 
>> Apple’s restrictive licensing on the OSX SDK.
> 
>Could you explain briefly or link to why this is? I understand that the
>App Store's restrictions would violate the GPL, and that Apple avoids
>distributing anything under GPLv3, presumably to avoid the tivoization
>clause, but I was not aware of any restrictions on what developers could
>independently build for macOS and distribute.
> 
> We build LilyPond on a Linux system, where all binaries are created by a 
> cross-compiler as part of GUB.  The system that hosts the build is not an 
> Apple system, and in fact, with our current hosting system, we don't even 
> know what kind of hardware is in use at any given moment.
> 
> The Apple Xcode license is available at 
> https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/xcode.pdf.
> 
> Paragraph 2.2.A gives the right to
> 
> "A. Install a reasonable number of copies of the Apple Software on 
> Apple-branded computers that
> are owned or controlled by You to be used internally by You or Your 
> Authorized Developers only as
> follows:
> (i) You may use the Xcode Developer Tools to test and develop application and 
> other software;
> (ii) You may use the macOS SDKs to test and develop application and other 
> software;"
> 
> Paragraph 2.2.B. gives the right to 
> 
> "B. Use Provisioning Profiles to install Your Applications onto a reasonable, 
> limited number of
> Authorized Test Units solely for use by You and/or Your Authorized Developers 
> and only for internal
> testing and development of Your Applications, or for Your own personal, 
> non-commercial use."
> 
> Paragraph 2.7 limits the use.
> 
> "2.7 Restrictions; No Other Permitted Uses
> The grants set forth in this Agreement do not permit You to, and You agree 
> not to, install, use or run the
> Apple Software or Apple Services on any non-Apple-branded computer or device, 
> or to enable others to
> do so. This Agreement does not allow the Apple Software or Services to be 
> made available over a
> network where they could be run or used by multiple computers at the same 
> time, unless otherwise
> expressly permitted in writing by Apple. Further, unless otherwise expressly 
> permitted by Apple in
> writing, You agree not to rent, lease, lend, upload to or host on any website 
> or server, sell, redistribute, or
> sublicense the Apple Software and Apple Services, in whole or in part, or to 
> enable others to do so."
> 
> Our current build system doesn't use the Apple SDK; instead it uses a Darwin 
> SDK which was created for use with open-source software.  Darwin is not 
> currently under development; the replacement for Darwin does not yet have an 
> SDK (and may not be able to get one, because of Apple's prohibition on 
> reverse-engineering the SDK.
> 
> I don't know if anybody has tried building 64-bit executables in GUB using 
> the current Darwin SDK.  If that works, we'd have a regular build.  But I 
> don't think that's a feasible path forward long-term.
> 
> The Homebrew/MacPorts build instructions have the user download Xcode, 
> thereby providing a copy of the SDK to the user that wants to build a copy of 
> lilypond.  This is consistent with the Apple license.
> 
> It seems we have four choices for providing Mac OSX executables going 
> forward, if the current SDK won't build 64-bit binaries:
> 
> 1) Provide users the ability to build their own executable.
> 2) Have somebody who owns a Mac build the lilypond executable and upload it 
> to the website.
> 3) Develop GUB to run on OSX and have someone who owns a Mac take 
> responsibility for running the GUB builds on OSX
> 4) Develop GUB to run in a VM on OSX, with links to the downloaded SDK on the 
> Mac host, and have someone who owns a Mac take responsibility for running the 
> GUB builds on the VM
> 
> I wish we had a better possibility, but I think that's all there is.
> 
> Carl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[David Kastrup]

Karlin High  writes:

> On 3/5/2019 11:10 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> I don't know if anybody has tried building 64-bit executables in GUB
>>> using the current Darwin SDK.  If that works, we'd have a regular
>>> build.  But I don't think that's a feasible path forward long-term.
>
>> I think it would be feasible and likely the best way forward but there
>> is no "current Darwin SDK" in use and I don't know what the current
>> status of such SDKs would be.
>
> I got the impression that GUB is parsing the target names to determine
> architecture and bitness. So I tried adding a "darwin-64" to the list
> of platforms in gub/settings.py just to see what would happen. It
> sort-of tried, then said something about its dependency for
> osx-lilypad doesn't exist for the platform.

Yes, Lilypad is a graphical application.  It would likely have to go.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Karlin High]

On 3/5/2019 11:10 AM, David Kastrup wrote:

I don't know if anybody has tried building 64-bit executables in GUB
using the current Darwin SDK.  If that works, we'd have a regular
build.  But I don't think that's a feasible path forward long-term.



I think it would be feasible and likely the best way forward but there
is no "current Darwin SDK" in use and I don't know what the current
status of such SDKs would be.


I got the impression that GUB is parsing the target names to determine 
architecture and bitness. So I tried adding a "darwin-64" to the list of 
platforms in gub/settings.py just to see what would happen. It sort-of 
tried, then said something about its dependency for osx-lilypad doesn't 
exist for the platform.

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[David Kastrup]

Carl Sorensen  writes:

> Our current build system doesn't use the Apple SDK; instead it uses a
> Darwin SDK which was created for use with open-source software.

Unfortunately, this is wishful thinking.  Our current build system uses
a version of the Apple SDK that is so old that we are unable to verify
which license it has been distributed under.  Its legal state is
"inconclusive" which does not mean that moving to "definitely illegal"
is warranted just because we are currently at state "possibly illegal".
Moving to a Darwin SDK would likely entail at least giving up some font
support and the inclusion of some basic editing environment (that
nobody™ really™ uses anyway).

> Darwin is not currently under development; the replacement for Darwin
> does not yet have an SDK (and may not be able to get one, because of
> Apple's prohibition on reverse-engineering the SDK.

That's mischaracterizing Darwin and our relation with it.  Darwin is a
BSD-UNIX based component of MacOSX.  As such, it is being actively
maintained and developed by Apple.  The license BSD UNIX is under
implies that Apple may make their fork proprietary if they so desire.
They have chosen to instead release it, BSD licensed, as "Open Source".
This was the basis for OpenDarwin, a third-party project trying to build
an open system on top of Darwin (which does not include the graphical
components and several other parts of MacOSX but should work reasonably
for providing command-line programs like LilyPond).  OpenDarwin finally
closed shop because Apple was constantly breaking their promise of
timely Open Source releases of Darwin which meant, among other things,
that OpenDarwin could not be made to run on contemporary Apple hardware.

I don't know by how much Apple's Darwin releases are dragging feet by
now (and whether that even matters for our purposes), what SDK would
possibly be available under conditions compatible with LilyPond and GUB.

In an alternate more desirable history, we'd have used OpenDarwin
resources so far for preparing our releases.  As it stands, we are using
an old MacOS SDK with unclear licensing conditions.

> I don't know if anybody has tried building 64-bit executables in GUB
> using the current Darwin SDK.  If that works, we'd have a regular
> build.  But I don't think that's a feasible path forward long-term.

I think it would be feasible and likely the best way forward but there
is no "current Darwin SDK" in use and I don't know what the current
status of such SDKs would be.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Carl Sorensen]

On 3/4/19, 10:20 PM, "Mason Hock"  wrote:

On 03/02, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> We cannot use our regular build system to create LilyPond binaries due to 
Apple’s restrictive licensing on the OSX SDK.

Could you explain briefly or link to why this is? I understand that the
App Store's restrictions would violate the GPL, and that Apple avoids
distributing anything under GPLv3, presumably to avoid the tivoization
clause, but I was not aware of any restrictions on what developers could
independently build for macOS and distribute.

We build LilyPond on a Linux system, where all binaries are created by a 
cross-compiler as part of GUB.  The system that hosts the build is not an Apple 
system, and in fact, with our current hosting system, we don't even know what 
kind of hardware is in use at any given moment.

The Apple Xcode license is available at 
https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/xcode.pdf.

Paragraph 2.2.A gives the right to

"A. Install a reasonable number of copies of the Apple Software on 
Apple-branded computers that
are owned or controlled by You to be used internally by You or Your Authorized 
Developers only as
follows:
(i) You may use the Xcode Developer Tools to test and develop application and 
other software;
(ii) You may use the macOS SDKs to test and develop application and other 
software;"

Paragraph 2.2.B. gives the right to 

"B. Use Provisioning Profiles to install Your Applications onto a reasonable, 
limited number of
Authorized Test Units solely for use by You and/or Your Authorized Developers 
and only for internal
testing and development of Your Applications, or for Your own personal, 
non-commercial use."

Paragraph 2.7 limits the use.

"2.7 Restrictions; No Other Permitted Uses
The grants set forth in this Agreement do not permit You to, and You agree not 
to, install, use or run the
Apple Software or Apple Services on any non-Apple-branded computer or device, 
or to enable others to
do so. This Agreement does not allow the Apple Software or Services to be made 
available over a
network where they could be run or used by multiple computers at the same time, 
unless otherwise
expressly permitted in writing by Apple. Further, unless otherwise expressly 
permitted by Apple in
writing, You agree not to rent, lease, lend, upload to or host on any website 
or server, sell, redistribute, or
sublicense the Apple Software and Apple Services, in whole or in part, or to 
enable others to do so."

Our current build system doesn't use the Apple SDK; instead it uses a Darwin 
SDK which was created for use with open-source software.  Darwin is not 
currently under development; the replacement for Darwin does not yet have an 
SDK (and may not be able to get one, because of Apple's prohibition on 
reverse-engineering the SDK.

I don't know if anybody has tried building 64-bit executables in GUB using the 
current Darwin SDK.  If that works, we'd have a regular build.  But I don't 
think that's a feasible path forward long-term.

The Homebrew/MacPorts build instructions have the user download Xcode, thereby 
providing a copy of the SDK to the user that wants to build a copy of lilypond. 
 This is consistent with the Apple license.

It seems we have four choices for providing Mac OSX executables going forward, 
if the current SDK won't build 64-bit binaries:

1) Provide users the ability to build their own executable.
2) Have somebody who owns a Mac build the lilypond executable and upload it to 
the website.
3) Develop GUB to run on OSX and have someone who owns a Mac take 
responsibility for running the GUB builds on OSX
4) Develop GUB to run in a VM on OSX, with links to the downloaded SDK on the 
Mac host, and have someone who owns a Mac take responsibility for running the 
GUB builds on the VM

I wish we had a better possibility, but I think that's all there is.

Carl




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[David Kastrup]

Karlin High  writes:

> On 3/5/2019 8:27 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
>> I have a half-dozen Mac machines (of various ages and superpowers)
>> here, most of which do nothing >95% of the time. If "running GUB for
>> official builds" is a relatively one-click process [assuming the
>> setup is already done, of course!], then I’m happy to volunteer
>> cycles.
>
> So far from being a one-click process, at this point it's still just a
> research project. GUB needs taught how to build for 64-bit macOS, this
> needs a newer macOS SDK, and Apple says "use XCode on a Mac instead."
> I'm trying to ask on Apple Developer Forum about this, to see if this
> issue is really closed as tightly as it appears. (More permissive
> license terms in the past, perhaps?)
>
> And I can't answer the question of whether such a remote-Mac-user
> arrangement for macOS builds is acceptable and workable for the
> developers and software builders.

It's really not our beef and native compilation under MacOSX appears
feasible, certainly a lot more so than for Windows.  We are not involved
with most of the distributed versions of LilyPond under either GNU/Linux
or FreeBSD, so it is not that the absence of an official GUB-compiled
version for MacOSX would spell death for LilyPond on that platform.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan  writes:

> Hi Karlin,
>
>> Nothing. But unless the person running GUB for official builds is a
>> big Mac fan and wants to go to extra effort to produce macOS
>> installers, it's doubtful those will be coming from lilypond.org.
>
> I have a half-dozen Mac machines (of various ages and superpowers)
> here, most of which do nothing >95% of the time. If "running GUB for
> official builds" is a relatively one-click process [assuming the setup
> is already done, of course!], then I’m happy to volunteer cycles.

I don't see that it makes sense tying our release process to Apple
hardware.  Apple may offer a viable cross-compilation path via Darwin:
I don't know.  But if we cannot crosscompile an official distribution in
a reasonable manner like we do with other official distributions, it's
just up to Apple fans to make our sources work on their systems while
heeding Apple's licensing.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Karlin High]

On 3/5/2019 8:27 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

I have a half-dozen Mac machines (of various ages and superpowers) here, most of which do 
nothing >95% of the time. If "running GUB for official builds" is a relatively 
one-click process [assuming the setup is already done, of course!], then I’m happy to 
volunteer cycles.


So far from being a one-click process, at this point it's still just a 
research project. GUB needs taught how to build for 64-bit macOS, this 
needs a newer macOS SDK, and Apple says "use XCode on a Mac instead." 
I'm trying to ask on Apple Developer Forum about this, to see if this 
issue is really closed as tightly as it appears. (More permissive 
license terms in the past, perhaps?)


And I can't answer the question of whether such a remote-Mac-user 
arrangement for macOS builds is acceptable and workable for the 
developers and software builders.

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Karlin,

> Nothing. But unless the person running GUB for official builds is a big Mac 
> fan and wants to go to extra effort to produce macOS installers, it's 
> doubtful those will be coming from lilypond.org.

I have a half-dozen Mac machines (of various ages and superpowers) here, most 
of which do nothing >95% of the time. If "running GUB for official builds" is a 
relatively one-click process [assuming the setup is already done, of course!], 
then I’m happy to volunteer cycles.

Best,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan  writes:

> Hi David,
>
>> Frankly, I am not overly interested in tap-dancing around the rules
>> Apple makes in order to keep its users from benefitting from software
>> freedom.  When the rules Apple makes prohibit us from providing LilyPond
>> on MacOSX in a useful and reasonably sustainable manner, the conclusion
>> is "don't buy a Mac if you want to use LilyPond".  When Apple demands
>> that we buy into Apple hardware for providing LilyPond or else, I
>> consider it reasonable to choose "else".
>
> That’s a bit extreme, isn’t it?

It is an extreme amount of bullshit, yes.  But the party responsible for
the extreme conditions for using an Apple SDK for the sake of providing
software making it more compelling to buy an Apple is Apple.

If they don't want software to be compiled for their systems in a
reasonable and sustainable manner in connection with Free Software, the
party to complain to is Apple.  They set the rules.  It's not our job
sticking out our necks ignoring those rules and making us targets for
their legal department.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Karlin High]

On 3/5/2019 7:32 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

what’s keeping someone with a Mac from compiling Lilypond on their Mac?


Nothing. But unless the person running GUB for official builds is a big 
Mac fan and wants to go to extra effort to produce macOS installers, 
it's doubtful those will be coming from lilypond.org.

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi David,

> Frankly, I am not overly interested in tap-dancing around the rules
> Apple makes in order to keep its users from benefitting from software
> freedom.  When the rules Apple makes prohibit us from providing LilyPond
> on MacOSX in a useful and reasonably sustainable manner, the conclusion
> is "don't buy a Mac if you want to use LilyPond".  When Apple demands
> that we buy into Apple hardware for providing LilyPond or else, I
> consider it reasonable to choose "else".

That’s a bit extreme, isn’t it? After all, this is an open-source project — 
what’s keeping someone with a Mac from compiling Lilypond on their Mac?

Cheers,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[David Kastrup]

Sven Axelsson  writes:

> On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 12:59, David Kastrup  wrote:
>
>> Apple disallows using the OSX SDK on non-Apple hardware.  That
>> definitely is a dealbreaker for GUB.
>>
>
> If that is the problem, couldn't we get around it by running GUB in a
> virtual machine on a Mac?

Frankly, I am not overly interested in tap-dancing around the rules
Apple makes in order to keep its users from benefitting from software
freedom.  When the rules Apple makes prohibit us from providing LilyPond
on MacOSX in a useful and reasonably sustainable manner, the conclusion
is "don't buy a Mac if you want to use LilyPond".  When Apple demands
that we buy into Apple hardware for providing LilyPond or else, I
consider it reasonable to choose "else".

Apple defines the limits of the usefulness of its computers as a
platform using legal means.  We are not doing its users a favor by
pretending this to be different.

There might be some way using just a Darwin SDK.  But it's well possible
that we'll just have to cease providing cross-compiled versions for
MacOSX ourselves and leave the job of creating non-official MaxOSX
versions from our comparatively generic sources to separate projects
involved with the Mac.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Sven Axelsson]

On Tue, 5 Mar 2019 at 12:59, David Kastrup  wrote:

> Apple disallows using the OSX SDK on non-Apple hardware.  That
> definitely is a dealbreaker for GUB.
>

If that is the problem, couldn't we get around it by running GUB in a
virtual machine on a Mac?

-- 
Sven Axelsson
++[>++>+++>++>++
><-]>.+..>+.>+.<<-.>>+.>.<<.
+++.>-.<<++.>>.<++.>>>++..>>.<.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[David Kastrup]

Mason Hock  writes:

> On 03/02, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> We cannot use our regular build system to create LilyPond binaries
>> due to Apple’s restrictive licensing on the OSX SDK.
>
> Could you explain briefly or link to why this is? I understand that the
> App Store's restrictions would violate the GPL, and that Apple avoids
> distributing anything under GPLv3, presumably to avoid the tivoization
> clause, but I was not aware of any restrictions on what developers could
> independently build for macOS and distribute.

Apple disallows using the OSX SDK on non-Apple hardware.  That
definitely is a dealbreaker for GUB.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Mason Hock]

On 03/02, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> We cannot use our regular build system to create LilyPond binaries due to 
> Apple’s restrictive licensing on the OSX SDK.

Could you explain briefly or link to why this is? I understand that the
App Store's restrictions would violate the GPL, and that Apple avoids
distributing anything under GPLv3, presumably to avoid the tivoization
clause, but I was not aware of any restrictions on what developers could
independently build for macOS and distribute.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Mark Probert]

Hi Robert

> 
> Thanks for your reassuring message. It helped.
>
You're welcome.

> 
> TeXShop took some time to consider whether it would or would not 
> process my _ly.tex-file, but after a few minutes it produced an 
> impeccable pdf.
>
The startup delay, at least the first time around, is making sure all 
the fonts are in place and working correctly. It should be, depending 
on the score of course, quicker next time.

> What surprised me was that the processing time on this extremely slow 
> iMac was about the same as on my MacBook.
> 
This is one of the reasons I'm sticking to my old clamshells. In my 
experience, they are the last of the "good macs"--the ones where I can 
upgrade the HD and memory, and have some control over my destiny. I, 
for one, am very happy to be able to run lilypond on it 

All the best.

 .. m.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Robert Blackstone]

Hi Mark,

Thanks for your reassuring message. It helped.
Today I copied  some LilyPond apps, plus the relevant TeXShop engines, to a 
External HD to transfer that stuff to my mid 2011 iMac, also High Sierra.

TeXShop took some time to consider whether it would or would not process my 
_ly.tex-file, but after a few minutes it produced an impeccable pdf.
What surprised me was that the processing time on this extremely slow iMac was 
about the same as on my MacBook.

Best regards,

Robert Blackstone

On 2 Mar 2019, at 21:45 , Mark Probert  wrote:

> 
> Hi, Robert. 
> 
>> 
>> Thanks for your prompt  reassuring response. 
>> I will now first test LilyPond on my other rather old and slow Mac, 
>> running on High Sierra.
>> 
> As another check point, I am happily running Lilypond (2.19.82) on a 
> mid-2011 13" MBP running OSX 10.13.6 (High Sierra). Best to install LP 
> from the official site rather than using Homebrew, in my experience.
> 
> HTH
> 
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Mark Probert]

Hi, Robert. 

> 
> Thanks for your prompt  reassuring response. 
> I will now first test LilyPond on my other rather old and slow Mac, 
> running on High Sierra.
>
As another check point, I am happily running Lilypond (2.19.82) on a 
mid-2011 13" MBP running OSX 10.13.6 (High Sierra). Best to install LP 
from the official site rather than using Homebrew, in my experience.

HTH


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Hans Åberg]

> On 2 Mar 2019, at 19:01, Carl Sorensen  wrote:
> 
> However, there has been discussion about this recently on the developer list. 
>  Hans Åberg recently completed a 64-bit MacPorts build on OSX and says it 
> works, although it takes a long time.  

It may be the dependencies that took a long time. By contrast, I did not notice 
the long cache build on the first compile on 32 bit version.

> You can read about this here: 
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2019-02/msg00228.html  
>  
> I’m sure that Hans would be willing to give you the MacPorts help you might 
> need to build LilyPond.

Just install MacPorts and run 'sudo port install lilypond' or 'sudo port 
install lilypond-devel' depending on which version you prefer.

Also, it might be useful with a script named 'lilypond' somewhere in the PATH 
with:
export LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8
export LANG=en_US.UTF-8
exec /opt/local/bin/lilypond "$@"



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Robert Blackstone]

Hi Karlin, Carl and Michael,

Thanks for your prompt  reassuring response. 
I will now first test LilyPond on my other rather old and slow Mac, running on 
High Sierra.
If that works I will upgrade mij MacBook.

Thanks again.

Best regards,

Robert Blackstone


On 2 Mar 2019, at 19:13 , Karlin High  wrote:

> On 3/2/2019 11:49 AM, Michael Hendry wrote:
>> MacOS 10.14 (Mojave) was apparently intended to be 64-bit only, but it still 
>> supports 32-bit code
> 
> Exactly. Mojave just gives a warning that future versions of macOS won't run 
> the software, and please contact the developer to remind them of this.
> -- 
> Karlin High
> Missouri, USA


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Karlin High]

On 3/2/2019 11:49 AM, Michael Hendry wrote:

MacOS 10.14 (Mojave) was apparently intended to be 64-bit only, but it still 
supports 32-bit code


Exactly. Mojave just gives a warning that future versions of macOS won't 
run the software, and please contact the developer to remind them of this.

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Michael Hendry]

> On 2 Mar 2019, at 17:36, Robert Blackstone  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi all, 
> 
> Up till now I have done all of my LilyPond work on a MacBook Pro with MacOSX 
> 10.9.5, alias Mavericks.
> 
> Recently DropBox warned me that on april 9  it will end the support of the 
> Dropbox Desktop App for this OS. In other words, to keep using this app., I 
> will have to upgrade my OS.
> 
> But if and when I do that I will no longer be able to use my LilyPond apps  
> since an upgraded Mac OS needs 64-bit versions. 

I don’t think it’s quite as urgent as you think. MacOS 10.14 (Mojave) was 
apparently intended to be 64-bit only, but it still supports 32-bit code, which 
will be phased out with the next release.

Michael


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

[Carl Sorensen]

From: Robert Blackstone 
Date: Saturday, March 2, 2019 at 10:36 AM
To: lilypond-user 
Subject: LilyPond 64-bit version for a Mac

Hi all,

Up till now I have done all of my LilyPond work on a MacBook Pro with MacOSX 
10.9.5, alias Mavericks.

Recently DropBox warned me that on april 9  it will end the support of the 
Dropbox Desktop App for this OS. In other words, to keep using this app., I 
will have to upgrade my OS.

You can upgrade to some version other than Mojave.  For example, I run Sierra 
(10.12.6) and it handles 32-bit apps just fine.

But if and when I do that I will no longer be able to use my LilyPond apps  
since an upgraded Mac OS needs 64-bit versions.

My problem is that I have no idea how and where to get a 64-bit version of 
LilyPond for a Mac and how to install it.

Could anybody help or instruct me?

We cannot use our regular build system to create LilyPond binaries due to 
Apple’s restrictive licensing on the OSX SDK.

However, there has been discussion about this recently on the developer list.  
Hans Åberg recently completed a 64-bit MacPorts build on OSX and says it works, 
although it takes a long time.  You can read about this here: 
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2019-02/msg00228.html

I’m sure that Hans would be willing to give you the MacPorts help you might 
need to build LilyPond.

HTH,

Carl

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user