> On 23 Aug 2018, at 21:12, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > On Thu 16 Aug 2018 at 22:55:29 (+0200), Hans Åberg wrote: >>> On 16 Aug 2018, at 22:35, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> There I would expect -I to be put ahead of the program system directories, >>>> so those latter can be overridden. I think GCC in the past may have had >>>> another behavior, and GCC 8 maybe added more options to regulate in detail. >>> >>> I'm not sure that is how LP is intended to work. I think the idea >>> would be that you redefine or override the assignments made by those >>> files if you want to change things and to do that, your files need >>> to run after LP's rather than preventing their interpretation entirely. >> >> GCC works like with PATH, using first occurrence only. So the compiler >> system files can be overridden that way. > > Yes, but the preprocessor can distinguish the system's #include files > from the user's own ones with <foo> and "foo".
LilyPond does not have that; I have no preferences whether it should. >> LilyPond has system files named like makam.ly, which is natural to use in >> ones own code. I think that then these are preferred rather than the local >> ones, which can be confusing. > > Exactly. The <LP-installation-path>/ly/*.ly files must be available in > order for LP to behave as documented. But unlike with C, they pollute > both the user's library paths *and* the user's source-file paths. One might get rid of that by adding <…>, and change "…" to first search the user directory. It would not affect any old lilypond code, I think, because if there are name clashes as it is now, the user code cannot be run. >>>>> Compounded with the problems caused by -o, there's probably every >>>>> reason to use an absolute path for the LP input file, particularly >>>>> in scripts. Perhaps the file handling could be revamped when the >>>>> major change in relative-includes is made (from #f to #t). >>>> >>>> Also -o I would expect to be relative the current directory. Autotools >>>> would expect that: if one compiles out of the source directory, then the >>>> generated files should normally end up in the build directory. >>> >>> I think -o *is* resolved relative to the current directory if it's a >>> relative path. The problem is that given, say: >>> >>> ~/here $ lilypond -o ../there/ source.ly >>> >>> the output looks like: >>> >>> GNU LilyPond 2.19.82 >>> Changing working directory to: `../there' >>> Processing `source.ly' >>> Parsing... >>> /usr/share/lilypond/2.19.82/ly/init.ly:43:1: error: cannot find file: >>> `source.ly' >>> >>> which implies that LP is trying to find here/../there/source.ly instead >>> of here/source.ly which is what the user intended. LP needs to resolve >>> all the relative paths on the commandline from $PWD *before* it >>> changes the value of $PWD itself. >> >> With GCC, only one item after -o belong to this option; additional ones are >> interpreted without the -o. > > Sure. LP is the same: you can only write the output to one directory, > or construct output filenames around one basic string. That wasn't my > point. The problem is cd-ing to -o's directory *before* resolving the > paths on the commandline (restating the paragraph above). GCC does not change the directory trying to pass it to -o as you wrote above; just a weird error I think. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
