Hi,
Using LilyPond from CVS (2.7.16), it seems that InnerStaffGroup brackets
are not translated to the left from the StaffGroup brackets, and thus
not really visible:
\version 2.7.16
\layout { raggedright = ##t }
\new StaffGroup
\new Staff { c' }
\new InnerStaffGroup
\new Staff { c' }
Using LilyPond from CVS (2.7.16), a strange artefact can be seen on
repeat bars, with PianoStaff:
\version 2.7.16
\layout { raggedright = ##t }
\new PianoStaff
\new Staff { c'1 \bar :|: \break c'1 }
\new Staff { c'1 c'1 }
___
bug-lilypond
Using LilyPond from CVS (2.7.26), \RemoveEmptyStaffContext does not seem
to work properly. See the example from
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.7/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Hiding-staves.html
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
fixed. Thanks!
Nicolas Sceaux wrote:
Using LilyPond from CVS (2.7.16), a strange artefact can be seen on
repeat bars, with PianoStaff:
\version 2.7.16
\layout { raggedright = ##t }
\new PianoStaff
\new Staff { c'1 \bar :|: \break c'1 }
\new Staff { c'1 c'1 }
fixed. Thanks!
Nicolas Sceaux wrote:
Hi,
Using LilyPond from CVS (2.7.16), it seems that InnerStaffGroup brackets
are not translated to the left from the StaffGroup brackets, and thus
not really visible:
\version 2.7.16
\layout { raggedright = ##t }
\new StaffGroup
\new Staff { c' }
Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fixed. Thanks!
How quick. Thank you.
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Hello.
I didn't receive any acknowledgment to the following posts:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2005-10/msg00169.html
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2005-10/msg00168.html
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2005-11/msg00277.html
Are these bugs?
If
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2005-11/msg00277.html
Are these bugs?
If not, what am I doing wrong?
If yes, were they known?
And are they already corrected in newer versions?
The first two, I don't know. The last one I don't
think used to be present, if you look in the old
Erlend Aasland wrote:
The new tie code fails to typeset this snippet correctly:
\relative c''' { g ~ g a ~ a b ~ b c ~ c d8 ~ d e ~ e f ~ f g ~ g }
Some ties are placed too high and some too low. Please see attached
pdf-files (one from 2.6.3 and one from 2.7.12).
This is fixed in CVS.
--
This is fixed in CVS.
Bertalan Fodor wrote:
In some situation, ties collide with augmentation dot:
\version 2.7.7
\score {
\new Staff {
\relative c' {
{
d'4. ~ d4 s4.
} \\
{
b d,4. ~ b d,4 s4.
}
}
}
}
10 matches
Mail list logo