On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 02:03 +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> As a composer by myself, it's a mystery to me why so many composers
> love to use 128th and 256th, most time for no good reason.
Let's ask ourselves about that well-known piano hack, Ludwig van
Beethoven. Later we'll turn to Mozart, who d
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 11:37 -0600, Trevor Bača wrote:
>
> The rule still taught in US classrooms for capitalizing titles is that
> the "important" words all get capitals (which comes down to something
> like prepositions and articles being lowercase, with everything else
> in uppercase). This is o
Ted Walther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Most hymns are sung in four part harmony. Or three part. However, they
> are entered as piano music. because they are almost always accompanied
> by a piano because we moderns don't spend much time memorizing complex
> melodies.
Actually, most hymns are
Ludovic RESLINGER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually I haven't tested, because I am on packaging of guile-1.8 in
> debian.
I think this is independently useful work to do (and thanks for taking
it on), and since upstream says they use 1.8 and everyone else says
that 1.8 works, and that 1.6.8
Ludovic RESLINGER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, I'm on the problem, to solve it, we need guile-1.8 serie.Hi,
Heikki Junes' email suggests that using 1.8 creates a different
problem; is this not your experience?
What guile is being used by the upstream developers? The installation
instructi
In lilypond 2.8.4, ly/music-functions-init.ly, there occurs the
following snippet (we're using Guile 1.6.8):
%% FIXME: guile-1.7 required?
%#(use-modules (scm display-lily))invalid module name for use-syntax ((srfi
srfi-39))
I am in fact seeing this error. Are there people successfully
buildi
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG schreef:
>> What does it mean that there are lilypond 2.8.5 binaries for some
>> archs, but only source for 2.8.4?
>
> That I botched the source upload of 2.8.5
I do that all the time. :) Does that
What does it mean that there are lilypond 2.8.5 binaries for some
archs, but only source for 2.8.4?
Thomas
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG schreef:
>> The problem is that lilypond's build system assumes that lilypond is
>> already installed on the system.
>>
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys said no, it uses LILYPONDPREFIX, but as I poi
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG schreef:
>
>> I'm distressed that nobody has bothered to fix the bug since then. In
>> the thread on the mailing list you can see that if LILYPONDPREFIX is
>> set correctly, the bug goes away.
&
Ludovic RESLINGER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I saw in archive some messages about a problem to build lilypond in
> debian unstable. I think this is not a problem of python's version, because
> I tested to build with python2.4 and python2.5, and the problem stay the
> same:
>
> chmod 755 out/con
Why do I never see release announcements on lilypond-devel?
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
how is it that there are binary packages for some systems for 2.8.2,
but no source?
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell writes:
>
>> Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2006-03/msg00066.html
>>
>> Thanks. I think for Debian it will be ok to just require python2.4.
>
> Good catch, the c
Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2006-03/msg00066.html
Thanks. I think for Debian it will be ok to just require python2.4.
So that still leaves as a bug the mismatch between how
make/lilypond-vars.make sets LILYPONDPREFIX and how
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/src/lilypond-2.8.1$ ls /usr/lib/python2.4/subprocess*
> /usr/lib/python2.4/subprocess.py /usr/lib/python2.4/subprocess.pyo
> /usr/lib/python2.4/subprocess.pyc
Sorry, what I meant to do here was:
$ ls /us
"Han-Wen Nienhuys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2006/4/28, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> File "scripts/out/convert-ly", line 39, in ? import
> lilylib as ly ImportError: No module named lilylib
>
Heikki Johannes Junes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A brute force solution was to "make" so many times, that you can finally
> see the missing buildscripts/out/ to appear, and the build to compile.
That doesn't work; it simply capitalizes on the bug in the Makefile
relying on the shell's > redir
I'm trying to build lilypond 2.8.1 on debian unstable.
Doing ./configure and make, it configures sensibly AFAICT, and starts
building, and then dies with the following:
/usr/bin/perl /home/src/lilypond-2.8.1/buildscripts/out/help2man out/convert-ly
> out/convert-ly.1
help2man: can't get `--help
Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In debian/control (the Description field, the last two lines).
Oops, that's a bug! Debian packages normally don't put that in the
Description at all. ;)
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.o
Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the Ubuntu package, an incorrect address to Han-Wen is given. The
> domain name is now xs4all.nl, not cs.uu.nl. (this was updated today in
> all source files).
Where in the package?
___
lilypond-devel mai
"Tyler Eaves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:07:17 -0400, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> You can use --preview to get an EPS fi
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You can use --preview to get an EPS file.
>
>> Title:CenturySchl.-Roma
>> Creator:LilyPond
>> CreationDate:Sun Mar 27 19:14:13 2005
>> but no actual music.
>> Eek. What might be wrong?
>
> this is normal. OO will only print the image.
Yeah, it turns
So I can produce (blurry) png images, but eps output produces files
that gs can't read and oowriter can't do anything with. gs simply
displays empty pages, and oowriter includes just boxes of the proper
size that say "Creator:LilyPond". No actual music.
gv's display is different: for the -1.eps
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What tex intricacies did you use? Integration with [la]tex documents
> is still supported, but using .eps snippets now.
Not many. I've never been a power lilypond user, and my needs would
be quite satisfied with .eps. I didn't much integrate it w
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Ok; they were once used for processing the texinfo docs, right?
>
> They are still used for producing the PDF documentatation, so there is
> still a build dependency on tetex. Also, tetex is great for making
> documents with lilypond snippets, but
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Well, it's a dangerous thing. Among other things, their version
>> numbers might collide badly with the official Debian ones. Best it
>> should have different package names to prevent this sort of thing from
>> happening.
>
> Whe have this on our
So the availability of mensural and "gregorian" square-note notation
in lilypond is great. Will we ever see diastematic neumes?! :)
(Just pushing the envelope...)
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/l
Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you print the document on a 1200 dpi printer, you must create
> 1200 dpi PNGs to get full quality. I don't know what "full size"
> means in terms of dpi, but if it means >=1200 dpi, then it should of
> course be ok for most users (though the correspon
Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> PNGs suffer from limited resolution. It's probably wiser to include .eps or
> embedded .pdf files (perhaps pngs can be used as preview images, if that's
> needed).
Why? If I generate a png at full size, how do I lose? What am I
missing?
_
OK, I'm building and uploading a new lilypond version for Debian with
the new patches that Jan Nieuwenhuizen helpfully provided. In
addition, dropping TeX from the build dependencies will make many
people happy.
It would be fun if (hint hint) there were a clever way to integrate
lilypond and ope
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>>>ec-fonts-mftraced
>> Wait, you mean showed up and is now gone? What's it for anymore?
>> Why
>> did we ever have it? :)
>
> It was for Lily 2.4, which supported Latin1
The INSTALL.txt says suggests the "International fonts" for building
the website, which of course we want in the Debian package.
These fonts are only needed to build the website, right, because the
fonts in question get embedded into the images?
Thomas
_
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> LilyPond no longer uses
>
> ec-fonts-mftraced
Wait, you mean showed up and is now gone? What's it for anymore? Why
did we ever have it? :)
> I think the package
>
> musixtex-fonts
>
> does not exist and if it does, I cannot imagine any co
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell writes:
>
>> But now there's a new, more subtle, one.
>
> Fixed in CVS, see patch below.
>
> Thanks for the report (and sorry that this kludge survived in the
> first place).
Ah, I like. Many thanks.
My patch was worse (to have an
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pedro Kröger) writes:
>
>>> This is very bad mojo and a violation of the GNU coding standards,
>>> which require that /usr/share is only for architecture independent
>>> files.
>>
&
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pedro Kröger) writes:
>> This is very bad mojo and a violation of the GNU coding standards,
>> which require that /usr/share is only for architecture independent
>> files.
>
> really? I thought that /usr/local/share was for architecture independent
> files:
>
> "The root of the
Lilypond installs a shared library in /usr/share, to wit:
/usr/share/lilypond/2.6.3/python/midi.so
(2.6.4 has the same problem.)
This is very bad mojo and a violation of the GNU coding standards,
which require that /usr/share is only for architecture independent
files.
Thomas
___
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At the very least, the code in lily.scm should be fixed to set the
> running-from-gui? flag on a sensible basis. Failing that, the --safe
> switch should be honored by lily-parser-scheme.cc.
I misunderstood here the purpose of
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But now there's a new, more subtle, one. Normal Debian automatic
> build procedure is to build things with input redirected from
> /dev/null.
Ok, I have found out (thanks to strace) where the rest of the output
is going; i
So delightfully, mftrace version 1.1.17 does indeed fix the previous
build problems.
But now there's a new, more subtle, one. Normal Debian automatic
build procedure is to build things with input redirected from
/dev/null.
This causes a failure in running lilypond for documentation
generation.
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm attempting a fix now.
Done; here is the patch:
--- /home/debian/mftrace-1.1.16/gf2pbm.c 2005-10-15 13:57:58.0 -0700
+++ /home/src/mftrace-1.1.16/gf2pbm.c 2005-10-15 14:23:49.0 -0700
@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@
uby
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>Ah, I have found the problem. The Debian package builds gf2pbm with
>>>optimization on (-O2). gf2pbm misbehaves when
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ah, I have found the problem. The Debian package builds gf2pbm with
> optimization on (-O2). gf2pbm misbehaves when compiled with
> optimization, and works fine when compiled without.
More specifically, failure happens with:
-
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>>>Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>>>>
>
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>>>
>>>>This is almost certainly not a compiler bug, of course, it's much more
&
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> This is almost certainly not a compiler bug, of course, it's much more
>> likely a problem inside gf2pbm.
>
> Aha, GCC spews some warnings about dubitable pointer manipulations.
>
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Hrmmph. Is this still an mftrace problem (does mftrace cmr10
>>> produce a .pfa which looks good in fontforge?)
>> Al
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Hrmmph. Is this still an mftrace problem (does mftrace cmr10
>>> produce a .pfa which looks good in fontforge?)
>> Al
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hrmmph. Is this still an mftrace problem (does mftrace cmr10 produce a
> .pfa which looks good in fontforge?)
Alas, no. I get no glyphs, and the output of mftrace is as follows.
BTW, there is presumably a missing "\n" on one of these printfs.
Tho
"Wiz Aus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> miss the many admittedly powerful tools that are available under linux.
> But never yet have I felt the slightly bit compelled to choose to develop
> under that platform. I'm sorry, but I like my GUI's, and my single
> keystroke
> compile and debug cycles,
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> I'm using mftrace version 1.1.12, and potrace version 1.7. Autotrace
>> version 0.31.1 is also installed, but mftrace says it uses potrace if
>> both are there. mftrace also u
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> I'm using mftrace version 1.1.12, and potrace version 1.7. Autotrace
>> version 0.31.1 is also installed, but mftrace says it uses potrace if
>> both are there. mftrace also u
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> from codepoint E100 onward, you should see isolated rests, accidentals
> and noteheads in the glyph table.
Well, it's no surprise that I didn't see anything!
Making progress here; clearly something is busted in font generation.
The fontforge call
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What are the "emmentaler" glyphs? I know music, but I don't know how
>> to recognize what I should see.
>
> gnome-character-map
> view > unicode block
> font : emmentaler
> block: private unicode area
>
> from codepoint E100 onward, you should see
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> input/example-1.ly:4:16: warning: note head `noteheads.s2' not found
>
> (combing from note-head.cc line 65), it doesn't contain the correct glyph.
>
> If you want to analyze the problem, you could trace into
> fm->find_by_name(idx) a few lines befo
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you want to analyze the problem, you could trace into
> fm->find_by_name(idx) a few lines before using gdb. It might be a
> compatibility problem with freetype. Do the emmentaler glyphs show up in
> gnome-character-map if you install the .otf i
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>can you do
>>>
>>> export LILYPONDPREFIX=
>>> lily/out/lilypond input/example-1
>>>
>
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> can you do
>
> export LILYPONDPREFIX=
> lily/out/lilypond input/example-1
>
> this should give the same errors.
Indeed it does (though without the infinite loop).
> Can you post what
>
> lily/out/lilypond --verbose input/example-1
>
> says?
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Lilypond 2.6.3 does not build on powerpc.
>> "make all" works fine, but "make web" fails.
>> The specific error happens while building the documentation thus:
>>
&
Lilypond 2.6.3 does not build on powerpc.
"make all" works fine, but "make web" fails.
The specific error happens while building the documentation thus:
one
Description: Binary data
(These last two lines then get printed forever in an apparent infinite
loop.)
The contents of the lily-177087
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-14 02:14]:
> > I know how to take care of the package. But Anthony Fok is currently
> > the maintainer, so he needs to either orphan it or offer it for
> > a
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for the offer! I'm not sure however how adopting a package
> works, I guess you'll have to sort with Anthony and Pedro.
I know how to take care of the package. But Anthony Fok is currently
the maintainer, so he needs to either orphan it or
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > We are a bit concerned with old LilyPond packages, and a potential
> > new maintainer (Pedro Kroger) with his sponsor going mia.
>
> Who was going to sponsor him?
I use lilypond all the time, so I'm happy to adopt it if necessary.
I'm a bad mentor
64 matches
Mail list logo
