"Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> writes: > "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> wrote in message > news:87mxqvcsvr....@lola.goethe.zz... >> >> Check the output of the following: >> >> test = { c-1-^ r f-2-^ r c-3-^ r f-4-^ r c-1-^ r f-2-^ r c-3-^ r } >> \score { >> \repeat unfold 8 { \test \test r >> \transpose c c''' \test \transpose c c''' \test r } >> \layout { ragged-bottom = ##t } >> } >> >> It is clear that on the first page, the \layout parameter ragged-bottom >> is ignored (or the first page would have, well, a ragged bottom and a >> vertical spacing similar to the packed last page). >> >> It is also clear on the second page that the vertical spacing is going >> overboard in compressing the page, partly intermingling the systems. >> >> Since it does not make sense to compress only the last page like that, >> the vertical spacing should, when ragged-bottom is not ##t (to get a >> valid regression test independent from the first problem, remove the >> layout line), not compress the resulting page beyond its page-breaking >> estimate, in order to get output spacing consistent with the layout of >> the previous pages. >> >> -- >> David Kastrup > > David, > > It would seem that there are a number of spacing issues with 2.13.35 > and as a result I opened > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1285. Joe has > responded to that to say that he's reverted the git code to the > 2.13.34 behaviour. Will this fix your issues?
Uh, the above test case _is_ for the current git version. > If so, we don't need to worry further. If not, it would be helpful to > produce a summary of the issue and test material so that a further > issue can be raised. What is wrong with the above? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
