2014-10-09 12:41 GMT+02:00 Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca>:
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 10:21:45AM +0000, tdanielsmu...@googlemail.com > wrote: > > I've not followed the corresponding email discussion closely, and maybe > > I've missed something, but how is this better than simply using \obreak > > for an original break, and \nbreak for a new, required, break, having > > defined > > > > obreak = \break > > nbreak = <> > ... > > That seems so simple anyone can do it without adding anything to the > > base code and almost a page to the documentation. > > This method is already in the documentation! At least, it used to > be... Learning Manual, "tips for typesetting" or something like > that? it's just possible it was moved to Notation or Usage at > some point. But it was definitely in the docs ten years ago. > (yes, literally 10 years ago. Mao, where did the time go?) > It's actually in Usage: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/usage/typesetting-existing-music But it's not enough, you should also use the information provided here: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/explicit-breaks ``` There are cases when manual \break or \pageBreak commands are ignored by LilyPond. There are two commands to override this behavior: \override NonMusicalPaperColumn.line-break-permission = ##f \override NonMusicalPaperColumn.page-break-permission = ##f ``` _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
