Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Antonio Ospite
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 00:25:03 +0100 Thomas Morley wrote: [...] > Hi Antonio, > > I figured to do a regtest-comparison between builds with guile 1.8.8 > and guile 2.0.13: > > For that I had to get back guile 1.8.8 and did a build from current master, > then I did 'make test-baseline'. > Then I co

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread David Kastrup
Antonio Ospite writes: > On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 00:25:03 +0100 > Thomas Morley wrote: > > [...] >> Hi Antonio, >> >> I figured to do a regtest-comparison between builds with guile 1.8.8 >> and guile 2.0.13: >> >> For that I had to get back guile 1.8.8 and did a build from current master, >> then

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Thomas Morley
2016-11-23 9:23 GMT+01:00 Antonio Ospite : > On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 00:25:03 +0100 > Thomas Morley wrote: > > [...] >> Hi Antonio, >> >> I figured to do a regtest-comparison between builds with guile 1.8.8 >> and guile 2.0.13: >> >> For that I had to get back guile 1.8.8 and did a build from current

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Thomas Morley
2016-11-23 9:34 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup : > Antonio Ospite writes: > >> On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 00:25:03 +0100 >> Thomas Morley wrote: >> >> [...] >>> Hi Antonio, >>> >>> I figured to do a regtest-comparison between builds with guile 1.8.8 >>> and guile 2.0.13: >>> >>> For that I had to get back guil

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Thomas Morley
2016-11-23 10:33 GMT+01:00 Thomas Morley : > > The regtest-comparison with your recent patches are fine. > No issue visible!! I didn't try a full make doc, but will do this afternoon. (I probably will have some time, without net-acces, though) Also, I'd like to test with a huge score. I remember

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread David Kastrup
Thomas Morley writes: > 2016-11-23 9:34 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup : >> Antonio Ospite writes: >> >>> On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 00:25:03 +0100 >>> Thomas Morley wrote: >>> >>> [...] Hi Antonio, I figured to do a regtest-comparison between builds with guile 1.8.8 and guile 2.0.13: >>>

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes: >> I imagine a plethora of users not having 2.0.12 and no reasonable >> chance for average users to get it. > > We'll want to keep compilable with Guile 1.8 for now. When configure > finds Guile less than 2.0.12, it will bomb out. Correction: Guile 2 less than 2.0.12. Obv

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Federico Bruni
Il giorno mer 23 nov 2016 alle 9:34, David Kastrup ha scritto: The question is whether it would make sense to temporarily base lilydev on something with the necessary packages instead of vanilla Ubuntu. There is a bit of impetus for getting a hold of the Guile-2.0 issue and I find that expand

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread David Kastrup
Federico Bruni writes: > Il giorno mer 23 nov 2016 alle 9:34, David Kastrup ha > scritto: >> The question is whether it would make sense to temporarily base >> lilydev >> on something with the necessary packages instead of vanilla Ubuntu. >> There is a bit of impetus for getting a hold of the Gu

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Antonio Ospite
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 09:34:05 +0100 David Kastrup wrote: > Antonio Ospite writes: > > > On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 00:25:03 +0100 > > Thomas Morley wrote: > > > > [...] > >> Hi Antonio, > >> > >> I figured to do a regtest-comparison between builds with guile 1.8.8 > >> and guile 2.0.13: > >> > >> Fo

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Federico Bruni
Il giorno mer 23 nov 2016 alle 15:10, Antonio Ospite ha scritto: Ah I didn't know about lilydev (https://github.com/fedelibre/LilyDev). Updating it to Debian testing aka Stretch (the _next_ Debian stable release) will expose people to guile-2.0.13. Federico, AFAICT the current 4.1 works fine f

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread David Pirotte
Hello, > The same goes for people wanting to try lilypond with guile-2.0.13, in > that case a debian unstable container is to be used. For info, 2.0.13+1-2 is in debian testing David. pgpjmlS3rvUKR.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ lilyp

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Thomas Morley
2016-11-23 15:52 GMT+01:00 Federico Bruni : > Il giorno mer 23 nov 2016 alle 15:10, Antonio Ospite ha > scritto: >> >> Ah I didn't know about lilydev (https://github.com/fedelibre/LilyDev). >> >> Updating it to Debian testing aka Stretch (the _next_ Debian stable >> release) will expose people to

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Thomas Morley
2016-11-23 9:23 GMT+01:00 Antonio Ospite : > > BTW the results are promising, with my latest patchset the UTF-8 > characters should be rendered fine. The images are not pixel perfect > because when using guile-2.0 the floating point numbers in the > postscript output are formatted slightly differe

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Paul
On 11/23/2016 06:09 PM, Thomas Morley wrote: Currently it seems I'm the only one being able to test Antonio's patches. This is not exactly optimal. [...] Having a LilyDev with guile 2.0.12/13 may help. I for one would be more likely to help with testing if there were a LilyDev with guile 2

Re: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Jan-Peter Voigt
Hi list, I am watching the guile-2-threads grow and really do appreciate that! Many thanks to Antonio, Harm, David, Federico, et al for allyour efforts on this! There is a another question I have in mind: What would it mean to create LilyDev as a container-based-solution? On my laptop and my

RE: guile-2.0 and debian

2016-11-23 Thread Andrew Bernard
Hi Harm, I have been wanting to launch into assisting with the guile 2 stuff for a long time. Happy to help. If you can give me some quick pointers offline to the exact set up of the environment we are using for this, I will help out. I have _lots_ of time and a seriously fast machine. Andrew --