On 4/22/21, 9:49 AM, "Bart Kummel" <b...@kummelweb.nl> wrote:
I think you should re-consider this comment: "The other option is ditching
LilyPad and doing a Darwin-only version of LilyPond, assuming that we can
do this with suitably free components.", by David Kastrup. I don't think
many people are using the limited editor LilyPad. There are a lot of better
tools available (Frescobaldi). I'd rather have a native LilyPond without
the *Pad, than having to compile it myself or rely on a Docker solution.
This implies that the only reason we need Apple's SDK is for compiling the
LilyPad editor. Is that true?
Is it possible to create a Mac app bundle without the SDK?
We currently have a MacPorts way to install LilyPond on 64-bit MacOS systems, a
Homebrew way to install LilyPond on 64-bit MacOS systems, and Marnen's work on
a 64-bit .app bundle for MacOS systems.
I really prefer the .app bundle, because it is path-independent and it makes it
easy for me to have multiple versions installed. As far as I know, only the
.app version can be delivered as a binary and installed any place I'd like to
put it.
If it were possible to have a MacOs .app bundle that could be created on
non-Apple hardware, even if all the app did was open the .ly file in TextEdit,
I'd be all over that. And I think I have some time this summer to try to make
it work. But I don't know enough about developing on the Mac to know if this
is possible. Does anybody else?
Thanks,
Carl
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
