On 25.12.2009, at 15:35, Graham Percival wrote:
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 03:05:42PM +0100, James Bailey wrote:
On 25.12.2009, at 14:04, John Mandereau wrote:
In which 2.13 release this bug appeared? A quick bisection
(testing no
more than four 2.13.x versions) should give the answer.
2.
Comment #14 on issue 854 by Carl.D.Sorensen: lilycontrib.tcl
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=854
Thanks for the kind words.
In order to get this under version control (other than in my own
lilycontrib git repository), I've added it to
scripts/auxiliar.
The check you added
Comment #13 on issue 854 by percival.music.ca: lilycontrib.tcl
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=854
Excellent! I tweaked the Abort colors (they work on linux) and robustified
the abort
and make_patch. (it warns you if you try to make a patch without doing a
local
commit
Updates:
Status: Started
Comment #12 on issue 854 by Carl.D.Sorensen: lilycontrib.tcl
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=854
Here is version 0.55.
It has improved layout.
The timing issues involved in copying before calling git reset --hard have
been resolved
After
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 03:05:42PM +0100, James Bailey wrote:
>
> On 25.12.2009, at 14:04, John Mandereau wrote:
>
>> In which 2.13 release this bug appeared? A quick bisection (testing no
>> more than four 2.13.x versions) should give the answer.
>
> 2.13.7. Can you explain this (testing no more
Comment #1 on issue 935 by john.mandereau: Enhancement: optional arguments
in music functions
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=935
Have you considered previous discussion like the subthread starting at
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-08/msg00233.html
be
On 25.12.2009, at 14:04, John Mandereau wrote:
Le vendredi 25 décembre 2009 à 10:30 +0100, James Bailey a écrit :
I include the old version statement, because that's the one in the
regression test, where this worked, although the problem only shows
up with the new version.
In which 2.13 rele
Le vendredi 25 décembre 2009 à 10:30 +0100, James Bailey a écrit :
> I include the old version statement, because that's the one in the
> regression test, where this worked, although the problem only shows
> up with the new version.
In which 2.13 release this bug appeared? A quick bisection (
As shown in the attached image, the \mark \markup is placed too far
to the left in 2.13.9. It was fine in 2.12. My question is, how
should I add this to the tracker? I'm not quite certain under what
circumstances the mark is so far to the left, and the problem is (I
think) more with the \ma
Comment #2 on issue 916 by jameseli...@googlemail.com: Broken regtest:
spacing-loose-grace-linebreak.ly
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=916
That explains why the image doesn't show up in the regtests.
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC f
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 12:25 AM, James Bailey
wrote:
>
> On 24.12.2009, at 23:57, Joe Neeman wrote:
>>
>>> profile-property-access.ly errors and fails when I try to compile it.
>>> Additionally, the properties shown in the output are all 0
>>
>> You need to configure with --disable-optimising in
On 24.12.2009, at 23:57, Joe Neeman wrote:
profile-property-access.ly errors and fails when I try to compile it.
Additionally, the properties shown in the output are all 0
You need to configure with --disable-optimising in order for property
access profiling to work.
Okay, since I can't com
12 matches
Mail list logo
