On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > No. Unfortunately, I just don't get excited about being on the bleeding > > edge of every package like you guys do. I'm working off the binary rpm > > version of lilypond. (Which means these patches are against the > > post-path-substituted version of lilypond-book.) > > > > If you could point me at an rpm of mftrace, it would help a lot. (I'm > > running fedora core 3, if it matters.) > > see > http://lilypond.org/download/binaries/Fedora-3/mftrace-1.1.7-1.i386.rpm
Thanks, I was trying to find one at http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen/mftrace/ Maybe you could add a link there. > I use it with the potrace binary from > > http://potrace.sourceforge.net/ > > > Anyhow, the html functions in lilypond-book seem a bit neglected, so I > > thought you guys might appreciate some help in that area. > > sure we do, but in the past days I've had my share of having to clean > up after patches that have been sent to me untested. There's a > problem in LilyPond CVS (in lilypond itself) that makes "make web" a > little problematic. I'll try fix that, and look over your patch in the > coming days; however, I would greatly appreciate it if you would give > it a whirl too. I understand the frustration. I'll try to do something this week. Anything you can do to make lilypond easier to compile, will make it easier for us to test things. ~ John Williams _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
