Am 30.03.2022 um 18:32 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:09 AM K. Blum <benbigno...@gmx.de> wrote: Am 30.03.2022 um 17:59 schrieb Carl Sorensen:But when I look at the code in OOoLilyPond/LilyPond.xba <https://github.com/OOoLilyPond/OOoLilyPond/blob/master/extension/OOoLilyPond/LilyPond.xba> I see that 1. There is a way to check the LilyPond version 2. The code already modifies include statements to add an appropriate path 3. The code builds the command used to call lilypondYes, that's true. As long as a modification of *how LilyPond is called on the command line* is sufficient, there is no problem at all. Would that be possible? I don't know. But the problem identified in the issue is related to adding a new lilypond option (-dlilypondbookoutput), which I assume lilypond-book calls but OOoLilyPond does not. If I were trying to solve this problem, that's where I would look to start. I suspect that the new option should be included when calling lilypond. But I have no experience with using OOoLilyPond, so I don't know this for sure. From what I read in Jean's response and on the GitLab issue page, I get the impression that it would be necessary to change the content of the *.ly files themselves. Is that correct? I think that is not true. Han-Wen said that the scheme code needed for compatibility with previous versions was two ly:set-option calls. And ly:set-option calls are available from the command line: (See the Usage Manual) <https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.22/Documentation/usage/command_002dline-usage#advanced-command-line-options-for-lilypond>. HTH, Carl
Hi Carl, thanks a lot, that sounds like really good news. I'm short in time right now, but I'll check that out and report back here. Cheers, Klaus
