On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 01:44:54AM +0100, James E. Bailey wrote: > On 29.10.2009, at 00:40, Graham Percival wrote: > > I suppose that I'm dealing with release issues at the moment, but > I think the python thing comes from the lilypad package > generation. Hmm, perhaps now that we have python in the lilypond > app, the scripts should use #!/path/to/lilypond/python rather than > #!/usr/bin/env python. Then again, maybe this is already done. > > Last I checked, they use env python
Try changing that to point to the python that's bundled with lilypond. If that one fails, then we should change the scripts or bundle hashlib or whatever. > As you start dealing with bugs, I hope you won't be disappointed. > > Ha! I've been a (partially) silent observer of lilypond development for at > least a year now. I have zero expectations, hopes, or desires when it > comes to issues being resolved. Well, you probably have *desires*. But I know what you're trying to say. :) > My only question at this point is, do I > add this to the tracker with a known workaround or what? I mainly only > concern myself with ways of getting the output that I need regardless of > the issue in question. Adding something to the tracker with a known workaround is perfectly fine, but for this specific issue, I'd wait a few days to see if the above recommendation fixes it. Basically, as long as we're actively discussing it, there's no point adding it to the tracker. If the discussion dies, then definitely add it. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
