Re: Scheme question: symbol to music
Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm. I guess I don't quite understand what you were asking; I
> can't see why \tag wouldn't work.
Using \tag requires that all the variables are defined, and the
variables that need (not) to be processed must get a tag.
leadWords = \lyricmode { Some lyrics }
highdWords = \tag #'ignore \lyricmode { Dummy }
medWords = \tag #'ignore \lyricmode { Dummy }
lowWords = \tag #'ignore \lyricmode { Dummy }
I want to obtain the same behaviour by just not defining the notwanted
parts. This makes it possible to develop powerful generic snippets
of lilypond code that can be used in many ways.
-- Johan
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Scheme question: symbol to music
Roman Stawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Take a look at http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=493
Nice!
Is there a way to get rid of the "warning: no such internal option:
target"?
> This lets you have constructs such as
>
> \ifTargetIn #'(foo) {
> ...
> }
A limitation is that it works on music expressions, while I would like
such a function to operate on (a series of) input lines.
Similar to
\ifTargetIn #'(foo) \include "somelines.ly"
but then with the contents of somelines.ly included, e.g.,
\ifTargetIn #'(foo) \do
... arbitrary lines of lilypond code ...
\done
-- Johan
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
No, I switched from Finale (7 Years) to Lilypond, but I use Lilypond "only" to write the score to have a basis to work with the music. And here is a problem : I can only export to midi not xml . So I export it to Finale (Human Playback from Robert Piéchaud) or Harmony Assistant (via Midi) and produce a decent playback using mostly Garritan samples. When it sounds good I export it back to a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) mostly using Samplitude to have an audible nice piece of music by tweaking the tracks a little more. And that was (is) the main reason why I switched after long years of Linux (Suse) back to XP. But this old XP Laptop is most of the time not online. Mails etc. will be done on a Mac or a Linuxmachine ;-) Hajo 2008/11/12 Tim Reeves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I also run Win Xp SP2 on my laptop (work provided) which is where I usually > run Lilypond (typical .ly file compile times are about 5+/-2 seconds from my > memory), but I have a Vista machine (newer, wife uses mainly) and an older > machine running Ubuntu for now at home. I want to get her used to the idea > of Linux and make the switch the next time Vista crashes hard ;-) > > Thanks for the information. > > Did you mean you switched from Lilypond back to some proprietary music > software and that forced you to use Windows instead of Linux? I don't know > what DAW is. > > > Tim Reeves > > > > > *"Hajo Dezelski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* > > 11/12/2008 12:43 PM > To > "Tim Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc > lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject > Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista > > > > > It was Ubuntu 8.10 but XP SP2 and I took the time measure from Lilypond. Of > course I ran the tests several times. On XP I only ran the necessary > processes and the compile times were stable. Ubuntu was right out of the box > and compile times differed. I switched back to XP for it was easier for me > to use other musical software (DAW) > > Hajo > > 2008/11/12 Tim Reeves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > "Hajo Dezelski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > Thinkpad x61sNewUbuntu (Linux)Dual 1,6 GHz2 GB4-5 s > Thinkpad x61sNewXP Dual 1,6 GHz2 GB2 s > > > Only one data point but interesting: Faster on WinXP than on Ubuntu. > Was it the latest of each? i.e. Ubuntu 8.10 and XP SP3? > > > > Tim Reeves > > > > -- > --- > ... indessen wandelt harmlos droben das Gestirn > -- --- ... indessen wandelt harmlos droben das Gestirn ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: installation on ToutouLinux 03.01.4
Charlie Ledocq wrote: ... I did there: lilypond Welcome_to_lilypond.ly and got the following return: # lilypond Welcome_to_LilyPond.ly lilypond: Symbol `scm_i_freelist' has different size in shared object, consider re-linking GNU LilyPond 2.10.33 Segmentation fault # pwd /usr/share/lilypond/2.10.33/ly # What does it mean? This is the kind of problem that normally are avoided by using the installation package available at http://lilypond.org/web/install/ From your first email, I would actually guess that the file somehow got corrupted or that just part of the file was downloaded, when you tried to download it. Could you please try it again (I hope your web browser saved the package directly as a file). The md5 sum of http://download.linuxaudio.org/lilypond/binaries/linux-x86/lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh is 8633802d5539e6aedf8f7f924ada4057 (check it by running the command "md5sum lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh") I hope you have some good tool to remove your current installation of LilyPond, otherwise you have to be very careful to run the correct version of the program. /Mats ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
e: Scheme question: symbol to music
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roman Stawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Take a look at http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=493
Nice!
Is there a way to get rid of the "warning: no such internal option:
target"?
I asked Nicolas Sceaux the same question when he helped me set this up.
Apparently, the internal options are hard-coded and the warning is
displayed before the scheme code is executed. :-(
This lets you have constructs such as
\ifTargetIn #'(foo) {
...
}
A limitation is that it works on music expressions, while I would like
such a function to operate on (a series of) input lines.
Similar to
\ifTargetIn #'(foo) \include "somelines.ly"
but then with the contents of somelines.ly included, e.g.,
\ifTargetIn #'(foo) \do
... arbitrary lines of lilypond code ...
\done
Agreed.
My original solution was to use a perl pre-processor that stripped out
unwanted code. This made debugging much more difficult since the lilypond
parser dosn't see the same thing as in the source code (different line
numbers and unexpected side-effects).
I've come across four cases using the 'ifTarget' solution
1. Musical expressions work fine (when used with grouping like <<...>> and
{...}
2. Scheme snippets and markup blocks for which there are #if-target-in
equivalents
3. Layout, paper and other context configuration can usually be handled by
scheme snippets, though some acrobatics may be necessary.
4. Top-level constructs (\include, \score, variable definitions) for which
I haven't been able to find a solution. On other hand, this hasn't raised
too many problems since the /contents/ of these constructs can always be
protected by the macros. The downside is that I need to live with warnings
such as "warning: no music found in score"
If you have any ideas on how to improve it, let me know
Roman
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Vertical spacing between the lyrics of two different verses
2008/11/13 Dmytro O. Redchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> \new Lyrics = "upperlyr" with {
> \new Lyrics = "lowerlyr" with {
Do you mean
\new Lyrics = "upperlyr" \with {
\new Lyrics = "lowerlyr" \with {
--
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
http://www.paconet.org
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: installation on ToutouLinux 03.01.4
Hi Mats! Mats Bengtsson a écrit : ... GNU LilyPond 2.10.33 Segmentation fault # pwd /usr/share/lilypond/2.10.33/ly # It is the result after an installation trial from the Slack file proposed at http://lilypond.org/web/install/ I could uninstall it with the Package Manager present on ToutouLinux. 8633802d5539e6aedf8f7f924ada4057 (check it by running the command "md5sum lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh") I got the same sum! Doing sh lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh returns the following: --- # sh lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh LilyPond installer for version 2.10.33 release 1. Use --help for help You're about to install lilypond in /usr/local/lilypond/ A script in /usr/local/bin/ will be created as a shortcut. Press ^C to abort, or Enter to proceed Making /usr/local/lilypond/ Creating script /usr/local/bin/lilypond Creating script /usr/local/bin/lilypond-wrapper.python Creating script /usr/local/bin/lilypond-wrapper.guile Creating script /usr/local/bin/uninstall-lilypond Untarring lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh tail: short write bzip2: Compressed file ends unexpectedly; perhaps it is corrupted? *Possible* reason follows. bzip2: Invalid argument Input file = (stdin), output file = (stdout) It is possible that the compressed file(s) have become corrupted. You can use the -tvv option to test integrity of such files. You can use the `bzip2recover' program to attempt to recover data from undamaged sections of corrupted files. tar: Child returned status 2 tar: Error exit delayed from previous errors To uninstall lilypond, run /usr/local//bin/uninstall-lilypond For license and warranty information, consult /usr/local/lilypond/license/README # --- Maybe an untarring difficulty which I cannot solve as yet by myself (as I'm newbie with Linux) . lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh has been built taking account of Puppy4.0 (says Valentin) from which ToutouLinux03.01 has been translated to french and derived (there are other differences I do not know about). I already asked help on the ToutouLinux forum. Cheers Charlie ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
opstarten
Ik heb Lilypond geinstalleerd op mijn computer Bij het aanklikken van de snelkoppeling krijg ik een bericht welke ik moet verplaatsen naar mijn bureaublad en daarna verslepen naar de snelkoppeling om programma te runnen. Dit werkt niet of ik doe iets verkeerd. Kunt U mij helpen Groeten GT ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
download page links
I just noticed that the "first use" and "User help" links take new users to the 2.10 documentation. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: opstarten
gerard Teerds wrote: Ik heb Lilypond geinstalleerd op mijn computer Bij het aanklikken van de snelkoppeling krijg ik een bericht welke ik moet verplaatsen naar mijn bureaublad en daarna verslepen naar de snelkoppeling om programma te runnen. Dit werkt niet of ik doe iets verkeerd. Kunt U mij helpen Gerard, this is an english mailinglist so I'll answer in english. You dun't run the lilypond program by itself. You make a lilypond file (.ly) and drag that to the shortcut. Or double-click the file itself, it should be coupled to the lilypond executable on installing. Maarten ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Jonathan The slowness is certainly not inherently due to Vista as LilyPond has always run fine under Vista here. The slowness issue was discussed at some length back in March 08 on both -user and -bug when it was determined that it was due to font building. This is almost certainly is cause of the recently reported slowness. Incidentally, a similar issue made LilyPond slow under XP too, and this was fixed with the 2.11.43 release. I don't understand the technical issues, but on Vista the fonts are contained in ~\.lilypond-fonts.cache-2. (To see these make sure you have the options set in Windows Explorer to Show hidden file and folders.) This should contain a number of smaller files (>=2) and one large file, c. 800Kb on my system. Check the date/time the large file was last modified. It should only be changed infrequently (I don't know what triggers it.) If it changes on every LP run, then this is the cause of the slowness. Two of the smaller files should be rebuilt on the first run after a new install, which causes the this first run to take more time, around 20 secs more, than subsequent runs. So what might cause this incorrect font cache rebuild? In the past, one cause was an incorrect version of libfontconfig-1.dll but this is unlikely now as the appropriate version of this dll is included with every binary. Another possibility is that when this dll searches for the font cache it checks for an old cache first. The fonts used to be cached in ~\.fontconfig. If such a directory is present it might be worth trying deleting it or moving it to another directory. Trevor - Original Message - From: "Jonathan Kulp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tim Slattery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:47 PM Subject: Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Tim Slattery wrote: Carl Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 545 Defect Verified Medium v.villenaveLilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Performance fixed_2_11_43 Rob, Have you checked that it's slow the _second_ time you run a file? It will be slow the first time it runs because it needs to build a font cache, but successive times should not be slow. On my Vista system, when I invoke Lilypond I get the GNU version notice, and then. it sits for almost 50 seconds, apparently doing NOTHING. Then it wakes up and processes the file. It's still usable, but it sure slows things down. For the sake of testing, I booted into my Vista Home Premium partition and installed the latest Lilypond binary from the download page. I ran a lilypond file once and it took about 90 seconds, then ran it a second time and it took more than 60 seconds. The same file on Linux compiles in less than 2 seconds. Honestly I don't know how anyone uses Vista as their main OS. This is a reasonably powerful laptop less than 6 months old with 2GB of RAM and a dual-core processor. I have all the aero eye candy disabled and it still runs 10x slower than the 8-year-old Gateway box in my office running Ubuntu 8.04. Man. Glad to be back on the Linux side :) Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Trevor, perhaps it's the other way around, that you don't suffer from the problems, since you already have a working cache file. Have you tried removing all your cache files (of course, keeping a back-up in a safe place) and trying the latest installation? /Mats Trevor Daniels wrote: Jonathan The slowness is certainly not inherently due to Vista as LilyPond has always run fine under Vista here. The slowness issue was discussed at some length back in March 08 on both -user and -bug when it was determined that it was due to font building. This is almost certainly is cause of the recently reported slowness. Incidentally, a similar issue made LilyPond slow under XP too, and this was fixed with the 2.11.43 release. I don't understand the technical issues, but on Vista the fonts are contained in ~\.lilypond-fonts.cache-2. (To see these make sure you have the options set in Windows Explorer to Show hidden file and folders.) This should contain a number of smaller files (>=2) and one large file, c. 800Kb on my system. Check the date/time the large file was last modified. It should only be changed infrequently (I don't know what triggers it.) If it changes on every LP run, then this is the cause of the slowness. Two of the smaller files should be rebuilt on the first run after a new install, which causes the this first run to take more time, around 20 secs more, than subsequent runs. So what might cause this incorrect font cache rebuild? In the past, one cause was an incorrect version of libfontconfig-1.dll but this is unlikely now as the appropriate version of this dll is included with every binary. Another possibility is that when this dll searches for the font cache it checks for an old cache first. The fonts used to be cached in ~\.fontconfig. If such a directory is present it might be worth trying deleting it or moving it to another directory. Trevor - Original Message - From: "Jonathan Kulp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tim Slattery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:47 PM Subject: Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Tim Slattery wrote: Carl Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 545 Defect Verified Medium v.villenaveLilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Performance fixed_2_11_43 Rob, Have you checked that it's slow the _second_ time you run a file? It will be slow the first time it runs because it needs to build a font cache, but successive times should not be slow. On my Vista system, when I invoke Lilypond I get the GNU version notice, and then. it sits for almost 50 seconds, apparently doing NOTHING. Then it wakes up and processes the file. It's still usable, but it sure slows things down. For the sake of testing, I booted into my Vista Home Premium partition and installed the latest Lilypond binary from the download page. I ran a lilypond file once and it took about 90 seconds, then ran it a second time and it took more than 60 seconds. The same file on Linux compiles in less than 2 seconds. Honestly I don't know how anyone uses Vista as their main OS. This is a reasonably powerful laptop less than 6 months old with 2GB of RAM and a dual-core processor. I have all the aero eye candy disabled and it still runs 10x slower than the 8-year-old Gateway box in my office running Ubuntu 8.04. Man. Glad to be back on the Linux side :) Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing School of Electrical Engineering Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Trevor, perhaps it's the other way around, that you don't suffer from the problems, since you already have a working cache file. Have you tried removing all your cache files (of course, keeping a back-up in a safe place) and trying the latest installation? /Mats Trevor Daniels wrote: Jonathan The slowness is certainly not inherently due to Vista as LilyPond has always run fine under Vista here. The slowness issue was discussed at some length back in March 08 on both -user and -bug when it was determined that it was due to font building. This is almost certainly is cause of the recently reported slowness. Incidentally, a similar issue made LilyPond slow under XP too, and this was fixed with the 2.11.43 release. I don't understand the technical issues, but on Vista the fonts are contained in ~\.lilypond-fonts.cache-2. (To see these make sure you have the options set in Windows Explorer to Show hidden file and folders.) This should contain a number of smaller files (>=2) and one large file, c. 800Kb on my system. Check the date/time the large file was last modified. It should only be changed infrequently (I don't know what triggers it.) If it changes on every LP run, then this is the cause of the slowness. Two of the smaller files should be rebuilt on the first run after a new install, which causes the this first run to take more time, around 20 secs more, than subsequent runs. So what might cause this incorrect font cache rebuild? In the past, one cause was an incorrect version of libfontconfig-1.dll but this is unlikely now as the appropriate version of this dll is included with every binary. Another possibility is that when this dll searches for the font cache it checks for an old cache first. The fonts used to be cached in ~\.fontconfig. If such a directory is present it might be worth trying deleting it or moving it to another directory. Trevor - Original Message - From: "Jonathan Kulp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tim Slattery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:47 PM Subject: Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Tim Slattery wrote: Carl Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 545 Defect Verified Medium v.villenaveLilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Performance fixed_2_11_43 Rob, Have you checked that it's slow the _second_ time you run a file? It will be slow the first time it runs because it needs to build a font cache, but successive times should not be slow. On my Vista system, when I invoke Lilypond I get the GNU version notice, and then. it sits for almost 50 seconds, apparently doing NOTHING. Then it wakes up and processes the file. It's still usable, but it sure slows things down. For the sake of testing, I booted into my Vista Home Premium partition and installed the latest Lilypond binary from the download page. I ran a lilypond file once and it took about 90 seconds, then ran it a second time and it took more than 60 seconds. The same file on Linux compiles in less than 2 seconds. Honestly I don't know how anyone uses Vista as their main OS. This is a reasonably powerful laptop less than 6 months old with 2GB of RAM and a dual-core processor. I have all the aero eye candy disabled and it still runs 10x slower than the 8-year-old Gateway box in my office running Ubuntu 8.04. Man. Glad to be back on the Linux side :) Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing School of Electrical Engineering Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: download page links
Bailey James E. wrote: I just noticed that the "first use" and "User help" links take new users to the 2.10 documentation. I think it makes sense to point to the stable version, waiting for 2.12. After all, the 2.11 documentation does not apply 100% to the stable version. Of course, we could update the web page with links to both 2.10 and 2.11, with appropriate comments on the virtues of the two versions, but then we have to remember to update the links again once 2.12 comes out. Currently, the link points to http://lilypond.org/doc/stable/... which automatically stays updated when there's a new stable release. /Mats ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: installation on ToutouLinux 03.01.4
Charlie Ledocq wrote: 8633802d5539e6aedf8f7f924ada4057 (check it by running the command "md5sum lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh") I got the same sum! Doing sh lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh returns the following: ... tail: short write I actually suspect that this line is the best indication of your problems. I tried to search the web for this error message but could find it. Could you please try to run the following commands tail -c+4591 ../lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh > lilynd-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.tar.bz2 tar jtvf lily/lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.tar.bz2 > filelist.txt In the resulting filelist.txt file, you should see a list of all the files in the installation. The command wc filelist.txt returns 2221 13473 201444 filelist.txt If you get any error messages from any of these commands, I guess we have come a bit closer to figuring out what the problem is. /Mats ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
fontconfig caches
Since there's so much talk of fontconfig caches, I thought I'd ask a question. On my lilypond build, the fontconfig cache is recreated in the working directory. So, for ~/lilypond\ project\ 1/test.ly when I compile that file, I'll get the fontconfig directory structure in ~/ lilypond\ project\ 1/ instead of the default /var/cache/fontconfig. Perhaps it's something with the way I've built lilypond or fontconfig. I don't see any other options, and my fontconfig has the default cache directory set as /var/cache/fontconfig. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
8ths on one line, smaller than regular notes, indicating "play as fast as you can"
I have no idea what this particular kind of notation is called. Here's an image that has an example of the kind of notation I'm looking for. http://img.skitch.com/20081113-mqfri72ahrsgi431gj87gpef1p.png What is this kind of notation called, and if it's possible in lilypond, how is it done? -- August Lilleaas Tlf: (+47) 915 28 701 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Mats, when I first obtained my laptop, c. March 08, I did a LilyPond installation with the then current 2.11 version on a clean system. So there were no lilypond font caches present. The performance was fine then and has been fine ever since. soon after, I tried various ways to cause the performance to degrade in an attempt to isolate the problem being experienced by others, but nothing I did had any effect - the performance always has been and still is good. In an attempt to isolate the problem again, I have just created a .fontconfig directory(empty, as I don't know what it should contain), downloaded 2.11.63 and reinstalled it. But it still compiles a 3-page file in just under 10 sec, (15 sec on first run). If I could ever get my system to run slowly we would have the answer, but now I'm out of ideas. Trevor Mats Bengtsson wrote Thursday, November 13, 2008 11:44 AM Trevor, perhaps it's the other way around, that you don't suffer from the problems, since you already have a working cache file. Have you tried removing all your cache files (of course, keeping a back-up in a safe place) and trying the latest installation? /Mats Trevor Daniels wrote: Jonathan The slowness is certainly not inherently due to Vista as LilyPond has always run fine under Vista here. The slowness issue was discussed at some length back in March 08 on both -user and -bug when it was determined that it was due to font building. This is almost certainly is cause of the recently reported slowness. Incidentally, a similar issue made LilyPond slow under XP too, and this was fixed with the 2.11.43 release. I don't understand the technical issues, but on Vista the fonts are contained in ~\.lilypond-fonts.cache-2. (To see these make sure you have the options set in Windows Explorer to Show hidden file and folders.) This should contain a number of smaller files (>=2) and one large file, c. 800Kb on my system. Check the date/time the large file was last modified. It should only be changed infrequently (I don't know what triggers it.) If it changes on every LP run, then this is the cause of the slowness. Two of the smaller files should be rebuilt on the first run after a new install, which causes the this first run to take more time, around 20 secs more, than subsequent runs. So what might cause this incorrect font cache rebuild? In the past, one cause was an incorrect version of libfontconfig-1.dll but this is unlikely now as the appropriate version of this dll is included with every binary. Another possibility is that when this dll searches for the font cache it checks for an old cache first. The fonts used to be cached in ~\.fontconfig. If such a directory is present it might be worth trying deleting it or moving it to another directory. Trevor - Original Message - From: "Jonathan Kulp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tim Slattery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:47 PM Subject: Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Tim Slattery wrote: Carl Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 545 Defect Verified Medium v.villenaveLilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Performance fixed_2_11_43 Rob, Have you checked that it's slow the _second_ time you run a file? It will be slow the first time it runs because it needs to build a font cache, but successive times should not be slow. On my Vista system, when I invoke Lilypond I get the GNU version notice, and then. it sits for almost 50 seconds, apparently doing NOTHING. Then it wakes up and processes the file. It's still usable, but it sure slows things down. For the sake of testing, I booted into my Vista Home Premium partition and installed the latest Lilypond binary from the download page. I ran a lilypond file once and it took about 90 seconds, then ran it a second time and it took more than 60 seconds. The same file on Linux compiles in less than 2 seconds. Honestly I don't know how anyone uses Vista as their main OS. This is a reasonably powerful laptop less than 6 months old with 2GB of RAM and a dual-core processor. I have all the aero eye candy disabled and it still runs 10x slower than the 8-year-old Gateway box in my office running Ubuntu 8.04. Man. Glad to be back on the Linux side :) Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing School of Electrical Engineering Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
dotted brevis
Dear Lilypond users, how can I get a dotted brevis with lilypond? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: dotted brevis
Popular question this week! See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2008-11/msg00245.html /Mats Stefan Thomas wrote: Dear Lilypond users, how can I get a dotted brevis with lilypond? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing School of Electrical Engineering Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Trevor, I wouldnt look in the first place at problems of Lilypond. I presume that it is a problem of Vista which has too many processes running in the background. You will find, that nearly all programs run slower on this OS. And even when you only need 10 seconds it is too much compared to what the processor could manage. You have a machine with much more horsepower under the hood compared to the "old" systems. And this system performance should not be consumed by the OS. Of course a normal user working only with Vista will not notice the difference. If you have the possibilty to install XP on your laptop I am sure that you will be astonished what you computer will be able to perform. We have tried that with different programs on different machines and nearly always had success. Hajo 2008/11/13 Trevor Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Mats, when I first obtained my laptop, c. March 08, I did a LilyPond > installation with the then current 2.11 version on a clean system. So there > were no lilypond font caches present. The performance was fine then and has > been fine ever since. soon after, I tried various ways to cause the > performance to degrade in an attempt to isolate the problem being > experienced by others, but nothing I did had any effect - the performance > always has been and still is good. > > In an attempt to isolate the problem again, I have just created a > .fontconfig directory(empty, as I don't know what it should contain), > downloaded 2.11.63 and reinstalled it. But it still compiles a 3-page file > in just under 10 sec, (15 sec on first run). If I could ever get my system > to run slowly we would have the answer, but now I'm out of ideas. > > Trevor > > Mats Bengtsson wrote Thursday, November 13, 2008 11:44 AM > > > > Trevor, perhaps it's the other way around, that you don't suffer from the >> problems, >> since you already have a working cache file. Have you tried removing all >> your >> cache files (of course, keeping a back-up in a safe place) and trying the >> latest >> installation? >> >> /Mats >> >> Trevor Daniels wrote: >> >>> Jonathan >>> >>> The slowness is certainly not inherently due to Vista >>> as LilyPond has always run fine under Vista here. The >>> slowness issue was discussed at some length back in >>> March 08 on both -user and -bug when it was determined >>> that it was due to font building. This is almost certainly >>> is cause of the recently reported slowness. Incidentally, >>> a similar issue made LilyPond slow under XP too, and this >>> was fixed with the 2.11.43 release. >>> >>> I don't understand the technical issues, but on Vista >>> the fonts are contained in ~\.lilypond-fonts.cache-2. >>> (To see these make sure you have the options set in >>> Windows Explorer to Show hidden file and folders.) >>> This should contain a number of smaller files (>=2) >>> and one large file, c. 800Kb on my system. Check the >>> date/time the large file was last modified. It should >>> only be changed infrequently (I don't know what triggers >>> it.) If it changes on every LP run, then this is the cause >>> of the slowness. Two of the smaller files should be rebuilt >>> on the first run after a new install, which causes the >>> this first run to take more time, around 20 secs more, >>> than subsequent runs. >>> >>> So what might cause this incorrect font cache rebuild? >>> >>> In the past, one cause was an incorrect version of >>> libfontconfig-1.dll but this is unlikely now as the >>> appropriate version of this dll is included with >>> every binary. Another possibility is that when this dll >>> searches for the font cache it checks for an old cache >>> first. The fonts used to be cached in ~\.fontconfig. >>> If such a directory is present it might be worth trying >>> deleting it or moving it to another directory. >>> >>> Trevor >>> >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - From: "Jonathan Kulp" < >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "Tim Slattery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:47 PM >>> Subject: Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista >>> >>> >>> Tim Slattery wrote: > Carl Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 545 Defect Verified Medium v.villenaveLilyPond is excessively >>> slow on Windows Vista Performance fixed_2_11_43 >>> >> Rob, >> >> Have you checked that it's slow the _second_ time you run a file? It >> will be slow the first time it runs because it needs to build a font >> cache, >> but successive times should not be slow. >> > > On my Vista system, when I invoke Lilypond I get the GNU version > notice, and then. > > it sits for almost 50 seconds, apparently doing NOTHING. Then it wakes > up and processes the file. It's still usable, but it sure slows things > down. > > For the sake of testing, I booted into my Vista Home Premium partition and installed the latest Lilypond binary from the
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Trevor Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The slowness is certainly not inherently due to Vista > as LilyPond has always run fine under Vista here. The > slowness issue was discussed at some length back in > March 08 on both -user and -bug when it was determined > that it was due to font building. This is almost certainly > is cause of the recently reported slowness. Incidentally, > a similar issue made LilyPond slow under XP too, and this > was fixed with the 2.11.43 release. > In the past, one cause was an incorrect version of > libfontconfig-1.dll but this is unlikely now as the > appropriate version of this dll is included with > every binary. Another possibility is that when this dll > searches for the font cache it checks for an old cache > first. The fonts used to be cached in ~\.fontconfig. > If such a directory is present it might be worth trying > deleting it or moving it to another directory. Trevor is correct. Every instance of lilypond slowness was caused by fontconfig caches. The problem is that there are a bazillion of windows versions; I'm not talking about XP vs. Vista but rather distinctions in minor version numbers, and perhaps changes that vendor do on top of that. For some versions, the fontconfig cache ends up not getting written (permission problems?) or getting recreated all the time. Once LilyPond has the font caches computed correctly, running times should differ little between windows, linux and mac. The problem is that the problem is often hard to diagnose and reproduce without having the afflicted machine at hand. In general, my takeaway from it is that shipping software on top of Windows is a religious experience. You can never be sure that it works, so you have to pray a lot. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: fontconfig caches
Look at /etc/fontconfig ; the default locations may be distribution dependent. On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Bailey James E. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since there's so much talk of fontconfig caches, I thought I'd ask a > question. On my lilypond build, the fontconfig cache is recreated in the > working directory. So, for ~/lilypond\ project\ 1/test.ly when I compile > that file, I'll get the fontconfig directory structure in ~/lilypond\ > project\ 1/ instead of the default /var/cache/fontconfig. Perhaps it's > something with the way I've built lilypond or fontconfig. I don't see any > other options, and my fontconfig has the default cache directory set as > /var/cache/fontconfig. > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
half diminished chord
Dear Lilypond-users,
in the below quoted example the symbol for the half diminished chord is, in
my opinion, not printed correctly.
How can I get the right one?
\version "2.11.59"
\header { title ="Beautiful love" composer = "Victor Young" }
melodie = { \key d \minor \time 4/4 \partial 2.
d'4 e' f'
a' 2. g'4
f'4 . e'8 d'4 e'8 f' ~
f'1 ~
f'8 f'4. g'4 a'
c'' 2. bes' 4
a'4. g'8 f'4 g'8 a' }
akkorde = \chordmode { e2.: e1:m7.5- %% this should be the half
diminished diminished chord, but it comes out wrong
a1:7 }
\score {
<<
\new ChordNames {
\set chordChanges = ##t
\akkorde
}
\new Staff \melodie
>>
\layout{ }
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: 8ths on one line, smaller than regular notes, indicating "play as fast as you can"
those are grace notes, with some cross-staff beaming Am 13.11.2008 um 13:16 schrieb August Lilleaas: I have no idea what this particular kind of notation is called. Here's an image that has an example of the kind of notation I'm looking for. http://img.skitch.com/20081113-mqfri72ahrsgi431gj87gpef1p.png What is this kind of notation called, and if it's possible in lilypond, how is it done? -- August Lilleaas Tlf: (+47) 915 28 701 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: fontconfig caches
what am I looking for? I don't have /etc/fontconfig. BTW, I'm using osx 10.5 and I build lilypond from sources. Am 13.11.2008 um 15:01 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys: Look at /etc/fontconfig ; the default locations may be distribution dependent. On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Bailey James E. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Since there's so much talk of fontconfig caches, I thought I'd ask a question. On my lilypond build, the fontconfig cache is recreated in the working directory. So, for ~/lilypond\ project\ 1/test.ly when I compile that file, I'll get the fontconfig directory structure in ~/lilypond\ project\ 1/ instead of the default /var/cache/fontconfig. Perhaps it's something with the way I've built lilypond or fontconfig. I don't see any other options, and my fontconfig has the default cache directory set as /var/cache/fontconfig. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Slides (Was Problems with em dash)
Well I've got what I want - to indicate move of a finger along the fretboard
without lifting it - by creating a music function to modify a glissando with
padding on the left and right:
slide = #(define-music-function (parser location padleft padright) (number?
number?)
#{
\once \override Glissando #'bound-details #'left #'padding =
#$padleft
\once \override Glissando #'bound-details #'right #'padding
= #$padright
#})
And then I can have in my score
e'4 e e |
4. 8 e4 \slide #3 #4 4\glissando |
e |
Which shows the move from G to F# in the upper voice in the attached png. To
do the same for the lower voice which contains chords at the point where I
want these indications, I'll guess have to create a hidden voice or voices
to which to attach the glissando.
Nick
<>___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Finding the relative coordinates of the NoteHead/NoteColumn grob to which a glissando is going
Hey lilypond users, I am using my own stencil for a glissando object and would like to feed it the exact X and Y extent it must traverse from its parent note grob to the grob at which it ends. ly:grob-property grob X-extent and ly:grob-object grob X-extent give me the Boolean #f on both accounts, so it's tough for me to grab the distance between two noteheads without resorting to a kludge - right now, I am attaching a markup to the NoteHead to which the glissando is going as a text identifier of sorts, searching for this markup in the VerticalAxisGroup, and grabbing the relative position of the NoteColumn to which said markup is attached. There must be a better way to go about this, and I am relative new to lilypond so I have yet to find it - any help would be much appreciated! Thanks thanks, ~Mike ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: half diminished chord
On 11/13/08 4:46 AM, "Stefan Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear Lilypond-users, > in the below quoted example the symbol for the half diminished chord is, in my > opinion, not printed correctly. > How can I get the right one? What do you want to have for the chord symbol? Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
2008/11/13 Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The problem is that the problem is often hard to diagnose and > reproduce without having the afflicted machine at hand. In general, > my takeaway from it is that shipping software on top of Windows is a > religious experience. You can never be sure that it works, so you have > to pray a lot. So what can we conclude for future users asking this? http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=FAQ -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) http://www.paconet.org ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Trevor Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Trevor is correct. Every instance of lilypond slowness was caused by fontconfig caches. The problem is that there are a bazillion of windows versions; I'm not talking about XP vs. Vista but rather distinctions in minor version numbers, and perhaps changes that vendor do on top of that. For some versions, the fontconfig cache ends up not getting written (permission problems?) or getting recreated all the time. Once LilyPond has the font caches computed correctly, running times should differ little between windows, linux and mac. The problem is that the problem is often hard to diagnose and reproduce without having the afflicted machine at hand. In general, my takeaway from it is that shipping software on top of Windows is a religious experience. You can never be sure that it works, so you have to pray a lot. Ok I just booted back into Vista and checked the fontconfig cache's time and date stamp, then ran my test lilypond file. The fontconfig cache was rebuilt. The date/time stamp changed to today's date and time. I ran the file again, the cache was rebuilt again. First time took about 90 seconds, second time 70 seconds. On my son's laptop (a Dell that's about 4 years old) there's a partition with XP and it ran the test file in about 10 seconds, which is still slower than the 2-3 seconds it takes under Ubuntu Linux on the same laptop. So, is there a way to tell the machine where the fontconfig cache file is so that it doesn't create a new one every time? I'll be glad to keep testing this but only about once a day. It's too painful to be in Vista for more than a couple of minutes at a time. In three minutes I got five warnings about my system and it wasn't even connected to the internet... Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Perhaps it's worth investigating if it's a problem that has come back in the most recent development versions or if the solution in version 2.11.43-2 only helped for some users. Could any of you seeing this problem try to install version 2.11.43-2 from http://download.linuxaudio.org/lilypond/binaries/mingw/lilypond-2.11.43-2.mingw.exe and see if it has the same problems. It's probably a good idea to remove all files related to the font cache first, so they don't interfere with the result. Also, could you confirm if you run with full administrator privileges or as an ordinary user? /Mats Jonathan Kulp wrote: Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Trevor Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Trevor is correct. Every instance of lilypond slowness was caused by fontconfig caches. The problem is that there are a bazillion of windows versions; I'm not talking about XP vs. Vista but rather distinctions in minor version numbers, and perhaps changes that vendor do on top of that. For some versions, the fontconfig cache ends up not getting written (permission problems?) or getting recreated all the time. Once LilyPond has the font caches computed correctly, running times should differ little between windows, linux and mac. The problem is that the problem is often hard to diagnose and reproduce without having the afflicted machine at hand. In general, my takeaway from it is that shipping software on top of Windows is a religious experience. You can never be sure that it works, so you have to pray a lot. Ok I just booted back into Vista and checked the fontconfig cache's time and date stamp, then ran my test lilypond file. The fontconfig cache was rebuilt. The date/time stamp changed to today's date and time. I ran the file again, the cache was rebuilt again. First time took about 90 seconds, second time 70 seconds. On my son's laptop (a Dell that's about 4 years old) there's a partition with XP and it ran the test file in about 10 seconds, which is still slower than the 2-3 seconds it takes under Ubuntu Linux on the same laptop. So, is there a way to tell the machine where the fontconfig cache file is so that it doesn't create a new one every time? I'll be glad to keep testing this but only about once a day. It's too painful to be in Vista for more than a couple of minutes at a time. In three minutes I got five warnings about my system and it wasn't even connected to the internet... Jon -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing School of Electrical Engineering Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: installation on ToutouLinux 03.01.4
Hi Mats, Mats Bengtsson a écrit : Could you please try to run the following commands tail -c+4591 ../lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh > lilynd-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.tar.bz2 tar jtvf lily/lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.tar.bz2 > filelist.txt In the resulting filelist.txt file, you should see a list of all the files in the installation. The command wc filelist.txt returns 2221 13473 201444 filelist.txt Running these commands: -- # tail -c+4591 lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh > lilypond-2.10.33-1.linu x-x86.tar.bz2 tail: short write # tar jtvf lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.tar.bz2 > filelist.txt bzip2: Compressed file ends unexpectedly; perhaps it is corrupted? *Possible* reason follows. bzip2: Inappropriate ioctl for device Input file = (stdin), output file = (stdout) It is possible that the compressed file(s) have become corrupted. You can use the -tvv option to test integrity of such files. You can use the `bzip2recover' program to attempt to recover data from undamaged sections of corrupted files. tar: Child returned status 2 tar: Error exit delayed from previous errors # ls filelist.txtlilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.sh lilypond-2.10.33-1.linux-x86.tar.bz2 # wc filelist.txt 0 0 0 filelist.txt # pwd /opt -- Charlie ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
This is quite simply untrue. When running a native program like LilyPond the operating system plays a minimal part in the execution time. It is true that the various extra facilities to do with display eye candy, security, etc in the later Windows OS's take more cpu power, but performance is more often related to disk speed than cpu. LilyPond doesn't use these, though. Trevor - Original Message - From: "Hajo Dezelski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Trevor Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Mats Bengtsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Tim Slattery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 1:48 PM Subject: Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Trevor, I wouldnt look in the first place at problems of Lilypond. I presume that it is a problem of Vista which has too many processes running in the background. You will find, that nearly all programs run slower on this OS. And even when you only need 10 seconds it is too much compared to what the processor could manage. You have a machine with much more horsepower under the hood compared to the "old" systems. And this system performance should not be consumed by the OS. Of course a normal user working only with Vista will not notice the difference. If you have the possibilty to install XP on your laptop I am sure that you will be astonished what you computer will be able to perform. We have tried that with different programs on different machines and nearly always had success. Hajo 2008/11/13 Trevor Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mats, when I first obtained my laptop, c. March 08, I did a LilyPond installation with the then current 2.11 version on a clean system. So there were no lilypond font caches present. The performance was fine then and has been fine ever since. soon after, I tried various ways to cause the performance to degrade in an attempt to isolate the problem being experienced by others, but nothing I did had any effect - the performance always has been and still is good. In an attempt to isolate the problem again, I have just created a .fontconfig directory(empty, as I don't know what it should contain), downloaded 2.11.63 and reinstalled it. But it still compiles a 3-page file in just under 10 sec, (15 sec on first run). If I could ever get my system to run slowly we would have the answer, but now I'm out of ideas. Trevor Mats Bengtsson wrote Thursday, November 13, 2008 11:44 AM Trevor, perhaps it's the other way around, that you don't suffer from the problems, since you already have a working cache file. Have you tried removing all your cache files (of course, keeping a back-up in a safe place) and trying the latest installation? /Mats Trevor Daniels wrote: Jonathan The slowness is certainly not inherently due to Vista as LilyPond has always run fine under Vista here. The slowness issue was discussed at some length back in March 08 on both -user and -bug when it was determined that it was due to font building. This is almost certainly is cause of the recently reported slowness. Incidentally, a similar issue made LilyPond slow under XP too, and this was fixed with the 2.11.43 release. I don't understand the technical issues, but on Vista the fonts are contained in ~\.lilypond-fonts.cache-2. (To see these make sure you have the options set in Windows Explorer to Show hidden file and folders.) This should contain a number of smaller files (>=2) and one large file, c. 800Kb on my system. Check the date/time the large file was last modified. It should only be changed infrequently (I don't know what triggers it.) If it changes on every LP run, then this is the cause of the slowness. Two of the smaller files should be rebuilt on the first run after a new install, which causes the this first run to take more time, around 20 secs more, than subsequent runs. So what might cause this incorrect font cache rebuild? In the past, one cause was an incorrect version of libfontconfig-1.dll but this is unlikely now as the appropriate version of this dll is included with every binary. Another possibility is that when this dll searches for the font cache it checks for an old cache first. The fonts used to be cached in ~\.fontconfig. If such a directory is present it might be worth trying deleting it or moving it to another directory. Trevor - Original Message - From: "Jonathan Kulp" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tim Slattery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:47 PM Subject: Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Tim Slattery wrote: Carl Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 545 Defect Verified Medium v.villenaveLilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista Performance fixed_2_11_43 Rob, Have you checked that it's slow the _second_ time you run a file? It will be slow the first time it runs because it needs to build a font cache, but successive times should not be slow. On my Vista system, when I invoke Lilypond I ge
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
> > > The problem is that the problem is often hard to diagnose and > reproduce without having the afflicted machine at hand. In general, > my takeaway from it is that shipping software on top of Windows is a > religious experience. You can never be sure that it works, so you have > to pray a lot. > Fwiw, one way to diagnose on an affected machine is to have process monitor (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896645.aspx) running while performing the problematic operation. After that, it is "just" a matter of wading through a humongous amont of log messages :) /Simon ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Mats Bengtsson wrote: Perhaps it's worth investigating if it's a problem that has come back in the most recent development versions or if the solution in version 2.11.43-2 only helped for some users. Could any of you seeing this problem try to install version 2.11.43-2 from http://download.linuxaudio.org/lilypond/binaries/mingw/lilypond-2.11.43-2.mingw.exe and see if it has the same problems. It's probably a good idea to remove all files related to the font cache first, so they don't interfere with the result. Also, could you confirm if you run with full administrator privileges or as an ordinary user? /Mats I installed version 2.11.43-2 and had exactly the same problem as before. I suppose I uninstalled the previous copy correctly, but it's been several years since I used Windows regularly and don't really know much about how it works. I used the add/remove programs feature of the control panel, chose Lilypond, and clicked "uninstall." The uninstaller ran (took a really long time--is this normal? Like 3-4 minutes, whereas on Linux it's about one second) and it said it was successful. Before I ran the uninstaller I deleted the cache files from the 2.11.63-1 installation. While Vista does run much slower in general than my Linux machines, I don't think it's the OS slowing Lilypond down in this case. I'm pretty sure there's no virus problems either since I hardly ever connect to the net while on Windows. The fontconfig cache file is definitely being modified each time (rebuilt, I suppose) because the time/date stamp on it changes every time I run a .ly file. I suspect this is the problem but have no idea what to do about it. Is there anything else I should try? Jon p.s. BTW Lilypond also runs kind of slow on my Macs, but not nearly as slow as on Vista. It's not slow enough where I'd think there was any real problem. -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
Mats Bengtsson wrote: Could any of you seeing this problem try to install version 2.11.43-2 from http://download.linuxaudio.org/lilypond/binaries/mingw/lilypond-2.11.43-2.mingw.exe and see if it has the same problems. It's probably a good idea to remove all files related to the font cache first, so they don't interfere with the result. Also, could you confirm if you run with full administrator privileges or as an ordinary user? /Mats Sorry, Mats, I forgot your last request. I was running with full admin privileges. It's Vista Home Premium on a Toshiba U305 13.3" laptop. 2GB of RAM, Intel dual-core processor. Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: fontconfig caches
Hi James, On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 6:15 AM, Bailey James E. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > what am I looking for? I don't have /etc/fontconfig. BTW, I'm using osx 10.5 > and I build lilypond from sources. The location of my fontconfig configuration file is /etc/fonts/fonts.conf This is on a GNU/Linux system. Built from source, and installed as a local user in $HOME/usr, my fontconfig cache resides in ~/.fontconfig. HTH, Patrick ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond is excessively slow on Windows Vista
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 3:19 AM, Trevor Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't understand the technical issues, but on Vista > the fonts are contained in ~\.lilypond-fonts.cache-2. > (To see these make sure you have the options set in > Windows Explorer to Show hidden file and folders.) > This should contain a number of smaller files (>=2) > and one large file, c. 800Kb on my system. Check the > date/time the large file was last modified. It should > only be changed infrequently (I don't know what triggers > it.) If it changes on every LP run, then this is the cause > of the slowness. Two of the smaller files should be rebuilt > on the first run after a new install, which causes the > this first run to take more time, around 20 secs more, > than subsequent runs. I just installed GUB builds of 2.11.63 on Windows XP and x86 GNU/Linux, and the cache folder has the same name on both of these systems. After the first run, 15 cache files are created on GNU/Linux, and 3 are created on Windows XP. And exactly one of these cache files is significantly larger than the others (163Kb on GNU/Linux, and 169Kb on Windows XP), just as you have said. However, on second and subsequent runs, the timestamp on the large cache file updates each time on Windows XP. This does not happen for me on GNU/Linux. This seems to be the reason behind the slightly "delayed" start after every invocation of LilyPond on Windows XP. lilypond --verbose shows the delay happening at the "Building font database." step. The delay on GNU/Linux is non-existent. Is the large cache file being rebuilt mistakenly (on some Windows systems)? I hope this test case helps! Thanks, Patrick ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Automatic indentation in Vim
Hi Lilyponders, Any Vim users here ? I'm using Vim for editing Lilypond files on a Linux Fedora 9 system. I have syntax highlighting, which is great. How do I enable automatic indentation to make things even easier ? -- Martin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic indentation in Vim
On 13.11.2008 (22:03), Martin Tarenskeen wrote: > Hi Lilyponders, > > Any Vim users here ? I'm using Vim for editing Lilypond files on a Linux > Fedora 9 system. I have syntax highlighting, which is great. How do I > enable automatic indentation to make things even easier ? set autoindent set smartindent filetype plugin indent on syntax on This is what I have in .vimrc. And then of course the lilypond ft-plugin. The indent file is loaded with set runtimepath+=/usr/share/lilypond//vim/ I'm also working on a "lyqi-mode" for vim. It's going to be great, some day, but don't hold your breath... e -- Neutrinos have bad breadth. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic indentation in Vim
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:03:02PM +0100, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: > Hi Lilyponders, > > Any Vim users here ? I'm using Vim for editing Lilypond files on a Linux > Fedora 9 system. I have syntax highlighting, which is great. How do I > enable automatic indentation to make things even easier ? :set cin ai will give you pretty good indentation that works for any file. For indentation tailored to Lilypond's syntax, you will find in /usr/share/lilypond/*/vim/indent/lilypond.vim the appropriate options. If you copy all the files in /usr/share/lilypond/*/vim/ to the directory ~/.vimfiles, being careful to keep the same directory structure, and make sure that the line filetype plugin indent on appears in your ~/.vimrc, then the indentation options, syntax highlighting, and settings for understanding lilypond's output messages so you can jump to errors in your file (see :help quickfix if you don't know about this feature) will all be automatically set up when you edit a .ly file. -- "Listen to your users, but ignore what they say." - Nathaniel Borenstein http://surreal.istic.org/ Calm down, it's only ones and zeroes. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic indentation in Vim
Eyolf Østrem wrote: On 13.11.2008 (22:03), Martin Tarenskeen wrote: Hi Lilyponders, Any Vim users here ? I'm using Vim for editing Lilypond files on a Linux Fedora 9 system. I have syntax highlighting, which is great. How do I enable automatic indentation to make things even easier ? Sorry, folks, but why does this email on Vim show up on the thread about Lilypond being excessively slow on Vista? (My email app is set to sort incoming mail by thread.) This has happened on a couple of other threads recently, too. Does this happen if someone hits reply-all to a thread and changes the subject line? Thunderbird thinks it belongs with the old thread. Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic indentation in Vim
On Nov 13, 2008, at 1:37 PM, Jonathan Kulp wrote: Sorry, folks, but why does this email on Vim show up on the thread about Lilypond being excessively slow on Vista? (My email app is set to sort incoming mail by thread.) This has happened on a couple of other threads recently, too. Does this happen if someone hits reply-all to a thread and changes the subject line? Thunderbird thinks it belongs with the old thread. Yes - it probably does (since information is placed into the email header when you hit reply). Please start new threads with new topics! Best, Josh Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ** /* Joshua D. Parmenter http://www.realizedsound.net/josh/ “Every composer – at all times and in all cases – gives his own interpretation of how modern society is structured: whether actively or passively, consciously or unconsciously, he makes choices in this regard. He may be conservative or he may subject himself to continual renewal; or he may strive for a revolutionary, historical or social palingenesis." - Luigi Nono */ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic indentation in Vim
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Jonathan Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry, folks, but why does this email on Vim show up on the thread about > Lilypond being excessively slow on Vista? (My email app is set to sort > incoming mail by thread.) This has happened on a couple of other threads > recently, too. Does this happen if someone hits reply-all to a thread and > changes the subject line? Thunderbird thinks it belongs with the old > thread. Yes, you're right! The message that started this thread contains Message-ID references from another thread. -Patrick ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic Indentation in Vim
Thanks for your help. I have now set up Vim with Lilypond syntax highlighting and automatic indentation. Good. I have also started a new thread this time. I didn't realize that just changing the subject line wasn't enough. -- Martin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic indentation in Vim
by the way, do you know how to change the default indentation in lilypond files from 2 spaces to 1 tabulation? Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic indentation in Vim
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 11:39:28PM +0100, Frédéric Bron wrote: > by the way, do you know how to change the default indentation in > lilypond files from 2 spaces to 1 tabulation? Yes. Edit the file ftplugin/lilypond.vim (in the ~/.vimfiles directory; copy it from /usr/share/lilypond/*/vim if you use the 'runtimepath' method of having Vim read the files that Lilypond installs there). Find the line setlocal shiftwidth=2 and delete it. Then Vim will use the same value that it uses for everything else. -- The first step in avoiding a trap is being aware of its existence. The second step is being aware that the first step is not the only one. http://surreal.istic.org/Why did you resign? signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Slides (Was Problems with em dash)
Hi Nick,
2008/11/13 Nick Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> To do the same for the lower voice which contains chords at the point where I
> want these indications, I'll guess have to create a hidden voice or voices
> to which to attach the glissando.
As an alternative, you could use \tweak to set the fingering text;
it's inserted between the note and the fingering:
\relative c' {
\set fingeringOrientations = #'(left)
}
Regards,
Neil
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: half diminished chord
On 11/13/08 4:46 AM, "Stefan Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Dear Lilypond-users,
> in the below quoted example the symbol for the half diminished chord is, in my
> opinion, not printed correctly.
> How can I get the right one?
This is described in the documentation. See the Notation Reference for
version 2.11, section 2.7.2 Displaying Chords under the subsection
Customizing chord names.
Here's a sample:
%%% Start code
chExceptionMusic = {
1-\markup { \concat { "m7(" \smaller {\flat} "5)"} }
}
chExceptions = #(append
(sequential-music-to-chord-exceptions chExceptionMusic #t)
ignatzekExceptions)
<<
\new ChordNames {
\set chordNameExceptions = #chExceptions
\chordmode {
c1:m7.5-
}
}
\new Staff {
\chordmode {
c1:m7.5-
}
}
>>
%%% End code
HTH,
Carl
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
beaming macro - fantastic!
I don't know who wrote the little macro for changing the default beaming behavior, but it's a fantastic time saver! Thankyou for sharing it in the Snippet Library. :) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
