Here is the original thread from the user list, where I did ask politely and
provided many screen shots and as much info as possible.
http://www.nabble.com/PDF-Problem-td11699420.html#a11699420
Grahmn acted like his usual elitist self, but I temporarily ignored him and
continued pleading.
a damn about the lilypond user community.
peace out
Dewdman42 wrote:
>
> If I knew how I would. isn't it obvious that a few people hold the power
> to control the development of lilypond while the rest of us are mere
> mortals?
>
>
> Han-Wen Nienhuys-5 wrote:
If I knew how I would. isn't it obvious that a few people hold the power to
control the development of lilypond while the rest of us are mere mortals?
Han-Wen Nienhuys-5 wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Dewdman42 wrote:
>>
>> 2 years and still nobody has b
2 years and still nobody has bothered to fix lilypond so that it can create
PDF's that actually look good in acroread?
(sigh)
I thought Rune was on to some good stuff there in 2007 and it appears nobody
would listen. Thanks Rune for your efforts in 2007, but I'm sorry to hear
that it was droppe
Thanks everyone for the responses. If the shipped lilypond binary is intel,
then I don't care about building it myself and I don't want to hassle with
it. And I agree that using vim or Simultron is better anyway.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Lily-on-OSX-Leopard%2C
What is the current status of Lilypond running on OSX leopard (intel)?
I have downloaded the latest binaries of lilypond, they appear to be PPC
binaries that will run only in command line mode on the Rosetta emulator. I
followed the helpful page from Nicolas Sceaux to try to build it myself fr
I am trying to use SPE as an IDE to work on musicxml2ly. When I run the py
script, I get the following error:
Reading MusicXML from 8.xml ...
Fatal Python error: Interpreter not initialized (version mismatch?)
Script terminated.
In order to use this IDE I have installed Python 2.4.2 (to
What is the status of porting NoteEdit to Windows?
Matevz Jekovec wrote:
>
>
>>xml2ly is:
>>If anybody has already tried xml2ly and got it to run properly, why are
they
>>not satisfied with it? Is it because the "necessary basic" is more than
just
>>the (claimed) features of the converter? It
