Hello,
2012/6/13 -Eluze
>
> when unfolded tremolo repeats have a factor of 7,14 or 15 the output looks
> weird:
>
I have added this as http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2602
Marek
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
htt
molo 15 {c''32 b'} \repeat unfold 1 e'16 }
(I've added the amount of e's to complete the measure - there should only be
one measure)
http://old.nabble.com/file/p34005569/repeattremolo.png
thanks
Eluze
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/%5
Comment #12 on issue 586 by plros...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
I don't think there is any bug that puts the slur start on the wrong
staff. Try adding this:
#(set-global-staff-size 20)
Now change the n
Comment #11 on issue 586 by paconet@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes
a weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Looking at that slur, one tends to believe that it thinks the starting
notehead is on the upper staff. Here I have put them effectively there
Updates:
Status: Verified
Comment #10 on issue 586 by k-ohara5...@oco.net: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Verified with 2.15.23
No more notes left of time signature. Default slur is as reasonable as
possible, with the
Comment #9 on issue 586 by paconet@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
No odd messajes with latest master, stems are OK and output is as example
image, bad slur and bad tuplet bracket
Comment #8 on issue 586 by mts...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
That's fine - the two branches will usually yield equivalent results (they
rarely differ by more than a few commits at a time).
I just compiled
Comment #7 on issue 586 by colingh...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Might be my mistake, as I used staging to build 2.15.23. I had the
impression that commits are pushed by the devs to staging
Comment #6 on issue 586 by mts...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
I get a clean compile and no odd log messages off of current master.
Can someone verify this against current master? Is the problem perhaps
coming
Comment #5 on issue 586 by colingh...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
I just tried the original sample with 2.15.23 and it doesn't seem to be
working. See attached console output and preview.
Attach
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #4 on issue 586 by mts...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
I take it back - I didn't realize that the E was in the tuplet. So the
bracket is correct. Marking as
Comment #2 on issue 586 by mts...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
As far as I can tell, this issue is fixed in the current master with the
most recent slur work. I do, however, think that the tuplet bracket's
Updates:
Owner: ---
Comment #1 on issue 586 by percival.music.ca: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Looks like issue 307, but it still deserves a picture.
Attachments:
foo.preview.png 12.8 KB
--
You received this
Actually, the bug report should perhaps be split into two bug reports, since
the notes starting too early happen even if you remove the slur.
/Mats
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Issue 586: Cross-staff slur causes a weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
New issue
Issue 586: Cross-staff slur causes a weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
New issue report by v.villenave:
% this example shows an extremely ugly slur
% (which can be much improved by setting #'positions
% to almost any value) but above all puts the first not
2008/3/4, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Copying two measures from Oscar's recent email, I came up
> with the following example
Thanks, added as
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Cheers,
Valentin
___
bug-lilypond mailing l
Copying two measures from Oscar's recent email, I came up
with the following example which both shows an extremely
ugly slur (which can be much improved by setting #'positions
to almost any value) but above all puts the first notes to the
left of the time signature. Admittedly, the slur is very di
Thanks, the italic umlaut problem turned out to be a problem with JPedal
(jEdit's PDF viewer). When viewed with Acrobat Reader the italic
umlauts were fine. As for the problem in the lyrics it turned out to be
a file encoding issue.
-David
Fred Leason wrote:
> David:
>
> Can't help you with wi
I had begun to suspect that JPedal was the culprit. I was posting my
"problem" PDF to a website and when I looked at it online it was fine.
Although the italic umlaut-u (and other umlauted vowewls) was rendered
properly, I still had an umlauted vowel in a lyric that was wrong.
-David
Mats Bengts
I seem to recall that there have been some reports on bugs
in JPedal, the PDF previewer used with jEdit. Why not check
the PDF file using Acrobat or some other PDF viewer and
report the bug to the JPedal developers (or upgrade to a
newer version) if that one turns out to be the culprit.
/Mats
OK, this is getting weirder. I installed Lily v2.11.23. I got the same
results and was going to post it on my website so anybody interested
could take a look. BUT; when I checked it online, rather than in the
previewer with jEdit...the umlaut-u was fine in the header. BUT; the
umlaut-a in the l
Hi David,
I have tested your example with LilyPond 2.11.23 (Windows), the
output is o.k..
Thomas
> Something odd is going on. In the example below, if I try to make the
> subtitle print in italics I get a strange result on the umlaut-u. I
> don't get two umlaut dots. I get only the one on the
I'm post this to both bug- and -user as I'm not sure what's going on.
The following file is essentially self-explanatory:
%%% BEGIN LILYPOND FILE
\version "2.10.20" %% On Windows
\header {
title = \markup {
%% commenting out \italic allows proper rendering
Something odd is going on. In the example below, if I try to make the
subtitle print in italics I get a strange result on the umlaut-u. I
don't get two umlaut dots. I get only the one on the right and it has
extra something sticking out of the left side making it look rather like
a single curly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Getting strange looking output. Looks like a font problem with latest
> CVS. It also shows up in the generated web-doc.
Yes, as the ChangeLog says:
* mf/feta-autometric.mf (code): start font at 32. WARNING: FONT
CHANGED.
clean out your font files.
-
Getting strange looking output. Looks like a font problem with latest
CVS. It also shows up in the generated web-doc.
-David Bobroff
___
Bug-lilypond mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
26 matches
Mail list logo
