Re: Question about autocompile bash script
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 09:05:49AM -0400, Carl Peterson wrote:
>
> These are along the lines of what I was thinking of. I don't have any
> experience with C. My programming experience as of late is in PHP. So I
> gave some thought last night to using it to read the files and trace the
> \include dependencies. I haven't had a chance to put any code down, but
> I'll probably take a look at that option.
This script is not very robust (it could croak if given malicious
filenames on the \include lines, possibly even causing data
loss), and it has some limitations on the kinds of \include
directives it will recognize (basically, only at the beginning of
a line, with optional leading whitespace), AND it doesn't quite
do what you requested(!), but perhaps it will give you some
ideas.
It takes a master .ly source code filename foo.ly, and a lilypond
output filename (foo.pdf, .eps, .png, etc.), and examines all the
includes in the source tree, and determines whether the output
filename is up to date. It endeavors to handle recursive
dependencies safely enough to handle circular includes, so that
part of the algorithm is relatively robust, but I'm always open
to suggested improvements. And there's probably some bugs too,
even apart from the lack of checking on filenames.
I definitely WOULD NOT use this script as-is in production mode.
It's just an instructional example to illustrate a CLI approach
of how to do some of the tasks you're seeking to accomplish. It
has some security problems that need to be fixed.
This script is written for the bash shell. Be sure that the
she-bang line reflects the location where bash is installed on
your system. \include filename paths in the .ly files must
either be absolute, or relative to the present working directory
where the script is run.
HTH!
Jim
Given these timestamps:
$ ls -lt top.ly [A-L].ly top.png
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 12 00:07 F.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 0 Sep 12 00:07 top.png
-rw--- 1 james wheel 48 Sep 11 23:55 top.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:52 L.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 52 Sep 11 23:28 A.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 D.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 E.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 G.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 H.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 I.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 J.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 K.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 B.ly
-rw--- 1 james wheel 16 Sep 11 23:17 C.ly
The script gives this output:
$ ./include-tree.sh top.ly top.png
file "top.ly" includes: "A.ly" "F.ly" "J.ly"
file "A.ly" includes: "B.ly"
file "F.ly" includes: "G.ly"
file "J.ly" includes: "K.ly"
file "B.ly" includes: "C.ly"
file "G.ly" includes: "H.ly"
file "K.ly" includes: "L.ly"
file "C.ly" includes: "D.ly"
file "H.ly" includes: "I.ly"
file "L.ly" includes: "A.ly"
file "D.ly" includes: "E.ly"
file "I.ly" includes: "J.ly"
File "A.ly" has already been read
file "E.ly" includes: "F.ly"
File "J.ly" has already been read
File "F.ly" has already been read
top.png is not up to date
#!/usr/local/bin/bash
# Script to accept a lilypond source filename and a lilypond
# output filename. The source filename is scanned for
# includes, and all the includes are scanned, ad infinitum.
# Once all the individual source filenames are known, the
# timestamps are compared to the timestamp of the output
# filename. If the output filename is the newest of all
# the files, we return success, else we return failure.
# Some restrictions apply to the contexts in which the
# lilypond \include directive is recognized:
# - it must begin a line, or have only whitespace before it
# - \include'd filenames must not contain unreasonable characters,
# and no checking is done to ensure compliance. Data loss could result.
includes_found_in_file()
{
# pass $1 with a filename, including quotes
# we'll output a list of all the \include'd filenames
# found in $1, one to a line, with quotes around them.
# at this time, we only recognize \include's that are on a
# line by themselves, with optional leading whitespace.
# \include'd filenames may not contain whitespace characters.
eval "egrep '^[[:blank:]]*[\]include[[:blank:]]*\"[^[:blank:]\"]*\"'
$1" | \
awk {'print $2'}
} # includes_found_in_file
already_read()
# pass $1 with a single filename
# pass $2 with a space-delimited list of files already read
# we'll return true iff $1 is in the list $2
{
egrep -qF " $1 " <<< "$2"
} # already_read
#
# main routine
#
# pass $1 with the name of the top-level .ly file
# pass $2 with the name of lilypond output file (.pdf/.png/.eps, whatever)
# we'll return success iff the output file is newer than
# all of the source files, else we'll return failure
# Put quotes around the top-level filename, assuming it exists
[
print from mac frescobaldi
It would be helpful if I could print directly from Frescobaldi (set up using Davide Liessi's instructions). While the standard print dialog appears, when print is pressed the message, "cannot connect to the printer" appears. Helpful suggestions appreciated! Thanks, Stan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Skip to Specific Bar
Dear Keiren, I think I understand much better what pushToTag does.
What I would like to know:
Who can I get Bar-Rests instead of spacer-rests for the length of intro
verse and bridge?
2013/9/10 Kieren MacMillan
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks! That does the trick.
>
> Below is the snippet as I was envisioning it. I believe it satisfies the
> OP request:
>
> > I'm writing a frenched score which has large gaps between the
> reappearance
> > of some staves. The piece is stuffed full of time signature changes, so
> I'm
> > hoping to find a way to skip input by a specified number of bars, or to a
> > specific bar. The only method I know is by inserting spacers or rests up
> to
> > where you want to start putting in notes, but this will take forever
> with a
> > piece like this.
>
>
> Hope it helps!
> Kieren.
> _
>
> \version "2.16.2"
>
> \layout {
> \context {
> \Staff
> \RemoveEmptyStaves
> \override VerticalAxisGroup #'remove-first = ##t
> }
> }
>
> global = {
> \tag #'intro
> << \time 4/4 s1*3 >>
> << \time 3/4 s4*3 >>
> \tag #'verse
> << \time 5/4 s4*5*12 >>
> \tag #'bridge
> << s4*5 >>
> << \time 4/4 s1 >>
> \tag #'coda
> << \time 2/2 s1*9 >>
> \bar "|."
> }
>
> allMusic = \relative c' {
> \repeat "unfold" 120 { c4 }
> }
>
> codaMusic = \relative f {
> \repeat "unfold" 6 { f2 }
> }
>
> \score {
> <<
> \new Staff << \global \allMusic >>
> \new Staff \pushToTag #'coda \codaMusic \global
> >>
> }
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Multiple midi outputs
Hello,
2013/9/12 Hilary Snaden
> Is there a way of generating different midi outputs from a single
> Lilypond script, similar to using \book with \bookOutputName?
>
>
You can have different "score" block for layout and midi. For every score
with midi you will get different midi file:
score {<<
\musicA
\musicB
>>
layout {}
}
score {
\musicA
midi {}
}
score {
\musicB
midi {}
}
HTH
--
Marek Klein
[image: Gregoriana]
[image: Gregoriana on twitter]
[image: Gregoriana on
YouTube]
[image: Graduale project]
Re: Skip to Specific Bar
Hi Stefan, > What I would like to know: > Who can I get Bar-Rests instead of spacer-rests for the length of intro verse > and bridge? This sounds like a job for a music function (applied on the global variable)! =) Hope this helps! Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Portfile for Frescobaldi on Mac
Op Wed, 11 Sep 2013 17:16:21 +0200 Jacques Menu schreef: > Thanks for everything, both frescobaldi and frescobaldi-devel work > fine now! Thanks to all people involved to make Frescobaldi on Mac OS X working! Best! Wilbert -- Wilbert Berendsen (http://www.wilbertberendsen.nl) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
All, I just installed LilyPond on a new laptop (same OS -- Windows 7 -- as before), but this time the registry entry HKCR\Python\shell\open\command\(Default), which is set to C:\Program Files\LilyPond\usr\bin\python.exe , interferes with my path to my Python installation in C:\Python27. There seem to have been problems regarding the registry in the past, but not exactly like the one I've encountered ... does anyone have handy info on how to convince Windows to let LilyPond run its own python while everything else runs my python? Thanks! Fred -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
Which LilyPond version? -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: Frederick Bartlett To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 2:32 PM Subject: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond All, I just installed LilyPond on a new laptop (same OS -- Windows 7 -- as before), but this time the registry entry HKCR\Python\shell\open\command\(Default), which is set to C:\Program Files\LilyPond\usr\bin\python.exe , interferes with my path to my Python installation in C:\Python27. There seem to have been problems regarding the registry in the past, but not exactly like the one I've encountered ... does anyone have handy info on how to convince Windows to let LilyPond run its own python while everything else runs my python? Thanks! Fred -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 -- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
Oh, sorry! 2.16.2 I have since found that I can run python scripts from the command line by typing, say, python myscript.py While just typing myscript produces an error, even though the Windows file association has been set to c:\Python27\python.exe. This seems, if anything, weirder than my last message. It's clearly a Windows problem ... I'm just hoping a LilyPonder will be able to explain the function of the LilyPond python registry key. Thanks again! Fred On 12 September 2013 10:09, Phil Holmes wrote: > ** > Which LilyPond version? > > -- > Phil Holmes > > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Frederick Bartlett > *To:* lilypond-user@gnu.org > *Sent:* Thursday, September 12, 2013 2:32 PM > *Subject:* Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond > > All, > > I just installed LilyPond on a new laptop (same OS -- Windows 7 -- as > before), but this time the registry entry > HKCR\Python\shell\open\command\(Default), which is set to C:\Program > Files\LilyPond\usr\bin\python.exe , interferes with my path to my > Python installation in C:\Python27. > > There seem to have been problems regarding the registry in the past, but > not exactly like the one I've encountered ... does anyone have handy info > on how to convince Windows to let LilyPond run its own python while > everything else runs my python? > > Thanks! > Fred > > -- > “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of > State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara > Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 > > -- > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > > -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Portfile for Frescobaldi on Mac
Thanks goes also to Wilbert Berendsen for creating Frescobaldi. As a Frescobaldi learning exercise, I encoded two pieces by J. F. Froberger - Ricereare I and Capriccio XV - a total of 20,018 keystrokes. Frescobaldi cut the time required at least by half, and I'm sure there are many shortcuts which I have yet to discover. Stan On Sep 12, 2013, at 8:02 AM, Wilbert Berendsen wrote: > Op Wed, 11 Sep 2013 17:16:21 +0200 > Jacques Menu schreef: > >> Thanks for everything, both frescobaldi and frescobaldi-devel work >> fine now! > > Thanks to all people involved to make Frescobaldi on Mac OS X working! > > Best! > Wilbert > > -- > Wilbert Berendsen > (http://www.wilbertberendsen.nl) > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
I believe it allows you to type progname.py at the command line, and have LilyPond's python run the script. -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: Frederick Bartlett To: Phil Holmes Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 3:16 PM Subject: Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond Oh, sorry! 2.16.2 I have since found that I can run python scripts from the command line by typing, say, python myscript.py While just typing myscript produces an error, even though the Windows file association has been set to c:\Python27\python.exe. This seems, if anything, weirder than my last message. It's clearly a Windows problem ... I'm just hoping a LilyPonder will be able to explain the function of the LilyPond python registry key. Thanks again! Fred On 12 September 2013 10:09, Phil Holmes wrote: Which LilyPond version? -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: Frederick Bartlett To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 2:32 PM Subject: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond All, I just installed LilyPond on a new laptop (same OS -- Windows 7 -- as before), but this time the registry entry HKCR\Python\shell\open\command\(Default), which is set to C:\Program Files\LilyPond\usr\bin\python.exe , interferes with my path to my Python installation in C:\Python27. There seem to have been problems regarding the registry in the past, but not exactly like the one I've encountered ... does anyone have handy info on how to convince Windows to let LilyPond run its own python while everything else runs my python? Thanks! Fred -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 -- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
Because if that registry entry is not added and the user has no other python, then they would not be able to run LilyPond's python scripts. -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: Frederick Bartlett To: Phil Holmes Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 3:56 PM Subject: Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond Well, yes ... but why would I want LilyPond's python to run a script instead of the system's python? Perhaps I'm just not advanced enough a LilyPond user Fred On 12 September 2013 10:22, Phil Holmes wrote: I believe it allows you to type progname.py at the command line, and have LilyPond's python run the script. -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: Frederick Bartlett To: Phil Holmes Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 3:16 PM Subject: Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond Oh, sorry! 2.16.2 I have since found that I can run python scripts from the command line by typing, say, python myscript.py While just typing myscript produces an error, even though the Windows file association has been set to c:\Python27\python.exe. This seems, if anything, weirder than my last message. It's clearly a Windows problem ... I'm just hoping a LilyPonder will be able to explain the function of the LilyPond python registry key. Thanks again! Fred On 12 September 2013 10:09, Phil Holmes wrote: Which LilyPond version? -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: Frederick Bartlett To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 2:32 PM Subject: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond All, I just installed LilyPond on a new laptop (same OS -- Windows 7 -- as before), but this time the registry entry HKCR\Python\shell\open\command\(Default), which is set to C:\Program Files\LilyPond\usr\bin\python.exe , interferes with my path to my Python installation in C:\Python27. There seem to have been problems regarding the registry in the past, but not exactly like the one I've encountered ... does anyone have handy info on how to convince Windows to let LilyPond run its own python while everything else runs my python? Thanks! Fred -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 -- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
Well, yes ... but why would I want LilyPond's python to run a script instead of the system's python? Perhaps I'm just not advanced enough a LilyPond user Fred On 12 September 2013 10:22, Phil Holmes wrote: > ** > I believe it allows you to type progname.py at the command line, and have > LilyPond's python run the script. > > -- > Phil Holmes > > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Frederick Bartlett > *To:* Phil Holmes > *Cc:* lilypond-user@gnu.org > *Sent:* Thursday, September 12, 2013 3:16 PM > *Subject:* Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond > >Oh, sorry! 2.16.2 > > I have since found that I can run python scripts from the command line by > typing, say, > python myscript.py > > While just typing > myscript > produces an error, even though the Windows file association has been set > to c:\Python27\python.exe. > > This seems, if anything, weirder than my last message. It's clearly a > Windows problem ... I'm just hoping a LilyPonder will be able to explain > the function of the LilyPond python registry key. > > Thanks again! > Fred > > > On 12 September 2013 10:09, Phil Holmes wrote: > >> ** >> Which LilyPond version? >> >> -- >> Phil Holmes >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >> *From:* Frederick Bartlett >> *To:* lilypond-user@gnu.org >> *Sent:* Thursday, September 12, 2013 2:32 PM >> *Subject:* Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond >> >> All, >> >> I just installed LilyPond on a new laptop (same OS -- Windows 7 -- as >> before), but this time the registry entry >> HKCR\Python\shell\open\command\(Default), which is set to C:\Program >> Files\LilyPond\usr\bin\python.exe , interferes with my path to my >> Python installation in C:\Python27. >> >> There seem to have been problems regarding the registry in the past, but >> not exactly like the one I've encountered ... does anyone have handy info >> on how to convince Windows to let LilyPond run its own python while >> everything else runs my python? >> >> Thanks! >> Fred >> >> -- >> “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of >> State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara >> Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 >> >> -- >> >> ___ >> lilypond-user mailing list >> lilypond-user@gnu.org >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user >> >> > > > -- > “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of > State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara > Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 > > -- “To my knowledge I have no knowledge.” -- John Kerry, the Secretary of State of the United States of America, in response to Senator Barbara Boxer, 3 Sep 2013 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
Carl Peterson writes: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:20 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Tim Roberts writes: >> >> > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> How does it make it harder? As I said, replying to a digest makes no >> >> sense with regard to message threading anyway. >> > >> > Of course it makes sense. I just did it, and your mailer is almost >> > certainly showing you the proper threading, isn't it? >> >> No, it isn't. Wrong References: header apparently (most definitely not >> pointing to the Message-Id: header of the article you are replying to). >> It's not possible to go to the parent article, and it is not possible to >> recall the entire thread from the server. Both are possible with proper >> replies. >> >> Maybe you think that the Subject header is all that is needed for proper >> threading, but of course it would not allow for the topical sort a >> proper thread display needs to do. > > > Funny thing...it showed up in my email system properly threaded. No idea what email system you are using, but the headers on your mail are References: <5231f387.6080...@probo.com> <87wqmmgdnq@fencepost.gnu.org> and when following that, one gets to my reply, Tim's posting, and then an inaccessible message since my mail system never got to see the digest. The In-Reply-To: header chain does just the same thing. So I have no idea how your email system would figure out just what mail Tim had been replying to. The information is just not there in the headers. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
Hi all, > I have no idea how your email system would figure out just what mail Tim > had been replying to. The information is just not there in the headers. Apple Mail uses the Subject (as text), and I imagine there are other applications that do the same. This of course leads to any number of frustrations, including "re: re: test" not being threaded with "re: test", and mail from completely different conversations (with the same subject line) being threaded together. Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Kieren MacMillan < kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca> wrote: > Hi all, > > > I have no idea how your email system would figure out just what mail Tim > > had been replying to. The information is just not there in the headers. > > Apple Mail uses the Subject (as text), and I imagine there are other > applications that do the same. > This of course leads to any number of frustrations, including "re: re: > test" not being threaded with "re: test", and mail from completely > different conversations (with the same subject line) being threaded > together. > > Cheers, > Kieren. > > David, Gmail is just that smart. It primarily uses the subject line, though I think it pays attention to some other things, as I can't recall having the problem Kieren describes. I think Gmail also looks for similarities in the body of the message. It has some awareness of how the body of a message is structured, as it commonly hides signature blocks (including the lilypond-user mailing list block) Regarding the actual subject matter, my previously-voiced frustration is that the individual messages are *not* set up to reply to the list by default. As a matter of consistency, I think both the individual messages and the digest should reply to the list, or neither. My preference is for both to do so. This is perhaps the only mailing list I've been on where that is not the case. The rest of you may have different experiences, but that is mine. Cheers, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
David Kastrup wrote: > How does it make it harder? As I said, replying to a digest makes no > sense with regard to message threading anyway. Of course it makes sense. I just did it, and your mailer is almost certainly showing you the proper threading, isn't it? -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:20 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Tim Roberts writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > >> How does it make it harder? As I said, replying to a digest makes no > >> sense with regard to message threading anyway. > > > > Of course it makes sense. I just did it, and your mailer is almost > > certainly showing you the proper threading, isn't it? > > No, it isn't. Wrong References: header apparently (most definitely not > pointing to the Message-Id: header of the article you are replying to). > It's not possible to go to the parent article, and it is not possible to > recall the entire thread from the server. Both are possible with proper > replies. > > Maybe you think that the Subject header is all that is needed for proper > threading, but of course it would not allow for the topical sort a > proper thread display needs to do. Funny thing...it showed up in my email system properly threaded. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
Tim Roberts writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> How does it make it harder? As I said, replying to a digest makes no >> sense with regard to message threading anyway. > > Of course it makes sense. I just did it, and your mailer is almost > certainly showing you the proper threading, isn't it? No, it isn't. Wrong References: header apparently (most definitely not pointing to the Message-Id: header of the article you are replying to). It's not possible to go to the parent article, and it is not possible to recall the entire thread from the server. Both are possible with proper replies. Maybe you think that the Subject header is all that is needed for proper threading, but of course it would not allow for the topical sort a proper thread display needs to do. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi all, > >> I have no idea how your email system would figure out just what mail Tim >> had been replying to. The information is just not there in the headers. > > Apple Mail uses the Subject (as text), and I imagine there are other > applications that do the same. Oh, short of other information, my mailing system groups together articles with a common subject line in chronological order. Sure. But it has no clue who replied to whom, and it can't fetch related mails from the server without reading a whole bunch of messages with various subjects based on their chronological order alone and then trying to sort based on subject and chronology afterwards. > This of course leads to any number of frustrations, including "re: re: > test" not being threaded with "re: test", and mail from completely > different conversations (with the same subject line) being threaded > together. Well yes, a thread is logically a _tree_. A chronological sort only renders a list, and that's just not useful for tracking a particular conversation to its start. There may be mailing systems that actually can't do better than that anyway, but most of them should preserve more from the threading. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > > I'm certain Gmail will also be able to figure out the mail you are > replying to without referring to any header at all as long as any Gmail > user has not yet deleted it (and probably even afterwards). But for a > normal mail server/client setup not relying on a universal freely > associating data kraken on the server end, one needs to have information > as specific as a Message Id in order to do reliable queries. My understanding is that Gmail does not cross reference messages from multiple accounts to figure out threading. I'll also issue a mea culpa of my own. When you mentioned threading, I was not thinking in the sense of a tree. I was only considering the idea of a "conversation," understanding which messages belong together. To my knowledge, Gmail does not attempt to figure out who is replying to whom, but uses a chronological sequencing. > > Regarding the actual subject matter, my previously-voiced frustration > > is that the individual messages are *not* set up to reply to the list > > by default. > > Don't use "Reply to sender" if you don't want to reply to the sender. (1) 99% of the time, if I'm replying to a message, I'm intending to reply to the list. Defaults are usually selected to in some way minimize effort, which brings me to (2), I'm lazy. Reply all requires extra mouse-clicks. > > As a matter of consistency, I think both the individual > > messages and the digest should reply to the list, or neither. > > Do you mean to imply that the digest _does_ add an explicit Reply-To: > header and it goes to the list? That would indeed be on the less than > sane side. > I have no idea what the digest does or doesn't do. I am replying to your prior statement, "Maybe the reply-to header of the digest should not even point to the list?" As Tim pointed out, the non-digest messages do not and your proposal would be logically consistent with that. I am simply stating a preference for the reply-to of both to do so. I don't see how this is on the less-than-sane side. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
Carl Peterson writes: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Kieren MacMillan < > kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca> wrote: > >> > I have no idea how your email system would figure out just what >> > mail Tim had been replying to. The information is just not there >> > in the headers. >> >> Apple Mail uses the Subject (as text), and I imagine there are other >> applications that do the same. This of course leads to any number of >> frustrations, including "re: re: test" not being threaded with "re: >> test", and mail from completely different conversations (with the >> same subject line) being threaded together. > > Gmail is just that smart. It primarily uses the subject line, though I > think it pays attention to some other things, as I can't recall having > the problem Kieren describes. I think Gmail also looks for > similarities in the body of the message. It has some awareness of how > the body of a message is structured, as it commonly hides signature > blocks (including the lilypond-user mailing list block) I'm certain Gmail will also be able to figure out the mail you are replying to without referring to any header at all as long as any Gmail user has not yet deleted it (and probably even afterwards). But for a normal mail server/client setup not relying on a universal freely associating data kraken on the server end, one needs to have information as specific as a Message Id in order to do reliable queries. > Regarding the actual subject matter, my previously-voiced frustration > is that the individual messages are *not* set up to reply to the list > by default. Don't use "Reply to sender" if you don't want to reply to the sender. > As a matter of consistency, I think both the individual > messages and the digest should reply to the list, or neither. Do you mean to imply that the digest _does_ add an explicit Reply-To: header and it goes to the list? That would indeed be on the less than sane side. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
Frederick Bartlett wrote: > > > Oh, sorry! 2.16.2 > > I have since found that I can run python scripts from the command line > by typing, say, > python myscript.py > > While just typing > myscript > produces an error, even though the Windows file association has been > set to c:\Python27\python.exe. The file association lets you type myscript.py If you want to be able to type "myscript", you need to add .py to the list of "automatic" extensions. That is stored in the PATHEXT environment variable: set PATHEXT=%PATHEXT%;.py;.pyw -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:48 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Not sure about that. The information usually is available in the > headers, and as far as I can tell, Gmail does preserve and maintain it > as well. So unless someone "breaks the chain", it would seem like a > poor choice not to actually use it. It may pass on the headers just fine, but as far as how the information is used for what I see, probably not as much. >> Don't use "Reply to sender" if you don't want to reply to the sender. > > > > > > (1) 99% of the time, if I'm replying to a message, I'm intending to > > reply to the list. Defaults are usually selected to in some way > > minimize effort, which brings me to (2), I'm lazy. Reply all requires > > extra mouse-clicks. > > Poor choice of user interface then. > Perhaps poor for me personally, but it is likely based on having a minimalist user interface and realizing that most people only "reply" to messages. It also discourages the delightful idiots who insist on replying all to a mass mailing (when the original sender didn't have the decency or know-how to stick the recipient names in the bcc). > > >> > As a matter of consistency, I think both the individual messages > >> > and the digest should reply to the list, or neither. > >> > >> Do you mean to imply that the digest _does_ add an explicit Reply-To: > >> header and it goes to the list? That would indeed be on the less > >> than sane side. > > > > I have no idea what the digest does or doesn't do. I am replying to > > your prior statement, "Maybe the reply-to header of the digest should > > not even point to the list?" As Tim pointed out, the non-digest > > messages do not and your proposal would be logically consistent with > > that. > > Not really. I was suggesting _adding_ a Reply-To header, but one that > does not go back to the list. > > > I am simply stating a preference for the reply-to of both to do so. > > As I said, replies from a digest rarely make sense because of breaking > the message threading. > This is a question of whether it makes sense from the human side or the computer side. From the computer side, certainly. However, adding a reply-to target doesn't fix that. If someone's going to reply from the digest, they're going to reply from the digest. It's a question of whether we force them to add the list address to the "to" box. >From the human side, I have no problem understanding the message threading if someone has properly removed the parts of the digest they aren't responding to and have replaced the digest subject line with the one from the actual conversation. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
Carl Peterson writes: > This is a question of whether it makes sense from the human side or > the computer side. From the computer side, certainly. However, adding > a reply-to target doesn't fix that. If someone's going to reply from > the digest, they're going to reply from the digest. You would likely be surprised. In the presence of a "Reply-To" header, both the standard "Reply" and "Reply-to-all" _have_ to go to the given address and nowhere else. Which is why adding a "Reply-To" header is a strong and often annoying measure. My mail reader Gnus offers an extra obscure "Reply to mail with broken Reply-To header" command for bypassing this, but in a web interface, this should not be an obvious choice. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
Carl Peterson writes: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> >> I'm certain Gmail will also be able to figure out the mail you are >> replying to without referring to any header at all as long as any Gmail >> user has not yet deleted it (and probably even afterwards). But for a >> normal mail server/client setup not relying on a universal freely >> associating data kraken on the server end, one needs to have information >> as specific as a Message Id in order to do reliable queries. > > > My understanding is that Gmail does not cross reference messages from > multiple accounts to figure out threading. I was being facetious here. I'm certain they don't want to point out the full amount of referencing/indexing/correlation they are doing. But they are not getting billions of advertising dollars for nothing. > I'll also issue a mea culpa of my own. When you mentioned threading, I > was not thinking in the sense of a tree. I was only considering the > idea of a "conversation," understanding which messages belong > together. To my knowledge, Gmail does not attempt to figure out who is > replying to whom, but uses a chronological sequencing. Not sure about that. The information usually is available in the headers, and as far as I can tell, Gmail does preserve and maintain it as well. So unless someone "breaks the chain", it would seem like a poor choice not to actually use it. >> Don't use "Reply to sender" if you don't want to reply to the sender. > > > (1) 99% of the time, if I'm replying to a message, I'm intending to > reply to the list. Defaults are usually selected to in some way > minimize effort, which brings me to (2), I'm lazy. Reply all requires > extra mouse-clicks. Poor choice of user interface then. >> > As a matter of consistency, I think both the individual messages >> > and the digest should reply to the list, or neither. >> >> Do you mean to imply that the digest _does_ add an explicit Reply-To: >> header and it goes to the list? That would indeed be on the less >> than sane side. > > I have no idea what the digest does or doesn't do. I am replying to > your prior statement, "Maybe the reply-to header of the digest should > not even point to the list?" As Tim pointed out, the non-digest > messages do not and your proposal would be logically consistent with > that. Not really. I was suggesting _adding_ a Reply-To header, but one that does not go back to the list. > I am simply stating a preference for the reply-to of both to do so. As I said, replies from a digest rarely make sense because of breaking the message threading. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
At 14:50 12/09/2013 -0500, Evan Driscoll wrote:
Now, that being said and because I'm sure no one cares, IMO the way
the Lilypond list is set up ("reply" goes to the sender) is
*absolutely* the correct way to run a mailing list, and the
alternative is completely maddening.
It's not just your opinion: mailing list processors have no business
inserting a Reply-To: header, which is instead the sole domain of the
message's author. RFC 2822 appears to require this: "When the
'Reply-To:' field is present, it indicates the mailbox(es) to which
the *author* of the message suggests that replies be sent" (my
emphasis). The author of a message, of course, is not the list.
What action is *common* is only one of the two things that should be
considered when assigning a default. Also should be considered is
how damaging the other choice is. Replying to the list when you want
to respond just to the sender has the potential to be a much more
"damaging" action than replying to just the sender when you want to
send to the list.
Exactly: the right way fails safe. A message intended to be public
may get sent privately by mistake - a minor inconvenience that can
easily be remedied by sending the message again correctly. The use
of a Reply-To: header directed to a list risks messages intended to
be private being sent publicly - a unfortunate consequence that
simply cannot be undone.
This mailing list is configured unusually but properly.
Brian Barker
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
David Kastrup writes: > As I said, replies from a digest rarely make sense because of breaking > the message threading. This is true, or at least I'm willing to take it as true - but if a digest exists, then it would be very strange and frustrating to try to disallow replying to it. Otherwise, if a digest subscriber wanted to reply to something, he'd have to travel backwards in time and subscribe himself to the individual messages instead, in time to catch the one he was interested in. :) So - cancel the digest? Or accept that replies will continue to come from it. I can't see any possible choice other than those two. People should remember to do the right thing every time, and people should be required to use mail client software that not only does the right thing but also steadfastly refuses to do the wrong thing. But people are not going to change like that unless Mr Kastrup makes a personal visit to each of their homes - and maybe not even then. :) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
The main reason I'm responding to this is to point out that if you use
digests, it's possible to configure it so that it sends each message as
an attachment instead of just dumping them all into the message body.
If you see something you want to respond to, you can just open up the
corresponding attachment and hit reply to that.
To set this up, go to the mailmain page
(https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/lilypond-user), find the "Get
MIME or Plain Text Digests?" question (currently the third), and set it
to to MIME.
A caveat: It's not the greatest interface, for third reasons. First,
depending on your email client you *may* have to open each attachment to
read the contents. However, this isn't a problem with Thunderbird and
probably others that display text attachments inline with the email
text, and what you see if you open the email in Thunderbird (or look at
it in the preview pane) is basically identical to the plain-text digest
mode. Second, if you're using something like Thunderbird that does so,
finding the attachment that corresponds to a message sometimes takes a
couple of tries, especially because each message actually comes through
twice and (at least in Thunderbird) you can only reply to one of them.
Not sure what's up with that. Third, it seems to lead to "Re: Re:"
headings for some reason. Not sure what's up with that either. As a
result it's not the best choice for everyone, but if you're like me and
want to cut down on the number of emails, but still skim over them for
ones of interest, but almost never reply, but want to be careful to
provide the correct in-reply-to etc. headers, I think it works well.
Evan
[I have reservations about sending the rest of this because I don't want
to carry the topic to far afield, but what the hell.]
Now, that being said and because I'm sure no one cares, IMO the way the
Lilypond list is set up ("reply" goes to the sender) is *absolutely* the
correct way to run a mailing list, and the alternative is completely
maddening.
On 9/12/2013 1:21 PM, Carl Peterson wrote:
> (1) 99% of the time, if I'm replying to a message, I'm intending to
> reply to the list. Defaults are usually selected to in some way minimize
> effort, which brings me to (2), I'm lazy. Reply all requires extra
> mouse-clicks.
Here's the flip side of that argument.
What action is *common* is only one of the two things that should be
considered when assigning a default. Also should be considered is how
damaging the other choice is. Replying to the list when you want to
respond just to the sender has the potential to be a much more
"damaging" action than replying to just the sender when you want to send
to the list.
On 9/12/2013 2:03 PM, Carl Peterson wrote:
> It also discourages the delightful idiots who insist on replying all
> to a mass mailing (when the original sender didn't have the decency or
> know-how to stick the recipient names in the bcc).
Personally I never really got that argument. I almost always reply all
to discussions like that. Why? The following two assumptions:
1) If the original sender CC'd someone, it's because they thought that
person would be interested in the contents.
2) If someone is interested in an email, there's a good chance they'll
be interested in follow-up emails.
I definitely pay attention to who I keep on the CC list and will remove
people if I have reason to believe the followup is a lot less relevant
for them, but that's my general rule of thumb. Maybe it's just because I
don't get enough emails, but I get *way* more annoyed when it seems like
I've been dropped from a mail thread that was relevant to me then I do
when I get extra emails that are *not* relevant.
Personally, I don't see the reason for BCC besides a CYA move.
Evan
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
Evan Driscoll writes: > I definitely pay attention to who I keep on the CC list and will > remove people if I have reason to believe the followup is a lot less > relevant for them, but that's my general rule of thumb. Maybe it's > just because I don't get enough emails, but I get *way* more annoyed > when it seems like I've been dropped from a mail thread that was > relevant to me then I do when I get extra emails that are *not* > relevant. > > Personally, I don't see the reason for BCC besides a CYA move. I use Bcc for my monthly (more or less) reports to people sponsoring my work on LilyPond. The nominal recipient is myself then. Most people don't _want_ their mail address to be distributed to a lot of people when they are not member of an actual discussion group. This is similar for mailing lists mostly used for announcements: not everybody subscribing to announcements wants to have his address advertised to other recipients. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Evan Driscoll wrote: > On 9/12/2013 2:03 PM, Carl Peterson wrote: > > It also discourages the delightful idiots who insist on replying all > > to a mass mailing (when the original sender didn't have the decency or > > know-how to stick the recipient names in the bcc). > > Personally I never really got that argument. I almost always reply all > to discussions like that. Why? The following two assumptions: > > 1) If the original sender CC'd someone, it's because they thought that >person would be interested in the contents. > > 2) If someone is interested in an email, there's a good chance they'll >be interested in follow-up emails. > > I definitely pay attention to who I keep on the CC list and will remove > people if I have reason to believe the followup is a lot less relevant > for them, but that's my general rule of thumb. Maybe it's just because I > don't get enough emails, but I get *way* more annoyed when it seems like > I've been dropped from a mail thread that was relevant to me then I do > when I get extra emails that are *not* relevant. > > Personally, I don't see the reason for BCC besides a CYA move. > > There are multiple reasons for using BCC. 1) If the email is a "report" of some kind, but is not intended for discussion, then the BCC allows the people who are interested in the report to receive the report, and makes it so that queries go back to the sender, who can choose what to do with that query. 2) If a person is "one of those" who sends stuff to everyone in their mailing list (shudders), then it means that if the person didn't want to receive it in the first place, they don't have to deal with the responses that result. 3) It respects the privacy of individuals. It is, unfortunately, not uncommon for people who are on one mailing list to use the recipient addresses to seed the recipient list of their own mailing list. 4) As a follow-up to #3 (and tangentially related to your use case), there may be times when a person needs to know but their identity cannot, for various reasons, be revealed to others. This is similar to what David posted (I just saw his reply come through) about donor reports. Donors can't be anonymous if everyone sees that they're donating. Many who send out frequent (legitimate) mass emails are having to utilize third-party list services, as more and more mail servers and clients are filtering the bulk recipient lists out as spam. Thus, the need for BCC is lessening (to being principally a preventative measure), but the need still exists. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
David Rogers writes: > David Kastrup writes: > >> As I said, replies from a digest rarely make sense because of breaking >> the message threading. > > This is true, or at least I'm willing to take it as true - but if a > digest exists, then it would be very strange and frustrating to try to > disallow replying to it. Otherwise, if a digest subscriber wanted to > reply to something, he'd have to travel backwards in time and subscribe > himself to the individual messages instead, in time to catch the one he > was interested in. :) Look it up on Gmane and reply to it individually. I've actually done that more than once. Yes, it's inconvenient. It's easier to read the whole traffic on a Gmane interface (I use Gmane via nntp). -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
- Original Message - From: "David Rogers" To: "David Kastrup" Cc: Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 9:02 PM Subject: Re: mea máxima culpa David Kastrup writes: As I said, replies from a digest rarely make sense because of breaking the message threading. This is true, or at least I'm willing to take it as true - but if a digest exists, then it would be very strange and frustrating to try to disallow replying to it. Otherwise, if a digest subscriber wanted to reply to something, he'd have to travel backwards in time and subscribe himself to the individual messages instead, in time to catch the one he was interested in. :) So - cancel the digest? Or accept that replies will continue to come from it. I can't see any possible choice other than those two. People should remember to do the right thing every time, and people should be required to use mail client software that not only does the right thing but also steadfastly refuses to do the wrong thing. But people are not going to change like that unless Mr Kastrup makes a personal visit to each of their homes - and maybe not even then. :) -- David R Folks. Chill. This overlong thread was in request to a very polite request not to quote a digest when replying to a single message. The quoter _slightly_ over-responded to that, but that's all. As an issue, it rarely surfaces on this list. Let's get back to developing LilyPond rather than sorting mailing list etiquette. -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
PDF portfolio of 2.17.26 docs
A PDF portfolio of the Extending, Internals, Learning, Notation, Snippets, Usage, and Web manuals is available at https://www.dropbox.com/s/s1oqbioxvu8630y/lilydoc-2.17.26.pdf (53MB) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
Hilary Snaden writes: > Nearly two years ago I wrote to this list commenting about major > problems (including registry residue) resulting from trying to run > Python 2, Python 3 and Lilypond on the same Windoze box. > > Since switching to GNU/Linux they've all got on just fine. Switching > to GNU/Linux is one of the best things I've ever done with a computer. To be fair: that's not an inherent advantage of either GNU or Linux. It is more a consequence of how a distribution or file system standard organises the names and places of shared libraries and how a package system drops things into place. Several different GNU/Linux systems do that differently, and several BSD variants have their own ways of doing things. That's not remarkable but rather solid engineering. The surprising thing is rather that Microsoft has not managed to bring system management into a sane state for a single-vendor distribution, leading to everybody and his dog tampering with the system in the so-called DLL hell. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
On 2013-09-12 14:32, Frederick Bartlett wrote: > All, > > I just installed LilyPond on a new laptop (same OS -- Windows 7 -- as > before), but this time the registry entry > HKCR\Python\shell\open\command\(Default), which is set to C:\Program > Files\LilyPond\usr\bin\python.exe , interferes with my path to my > Python installation in C:\Python27. > > There seem to have been problems regarding the registry in the past, but > not exactly like the one I've encountered ... does anyone have handy info > on how to convince Windows to let LilyPond run its own python while > everything else runs my python? Nearly two years ago I wrote to this list commenting about major problems (including registry residue) resulting from trying to run Python 2, Python 3 and Lilypond on the same Windoze box. Since switching to GNU/Linux they've all got on just fine. Switching to GNU/Linux is one of the best things I've ever done with a computer. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Multiple midi outputs
On 12/09/13 07:25, Hilary Snaden wrote: > Is there a way of generating different midi outputs from a single > Lilypond script, similar to using \book with \bookOutputName? > Issue 1354 Cheers Ian ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
Hilary Snaden wrote > On 2013-09-12 14:32, Frederick Bartlett wrote: > >> There seem to have been problems regarding the registry in the past, but >> not exactly like the one I've encountered ... does anyone have handy info >> on how to convince Windows to let LilyPond run its own python while >> everything else runs my python? > > Nearly two years ago I wrote to this list commenting about major > problems (including registry residue) resulting from trying to run > Python 2, Python 3 and Lilypond on the same Windoze box. >> which contribution do you mean exactly? > Since switching to GNU/Linux they've all got on just fine. Switching to > GNU/Linux is one of the best things I've ever done with a computer. I'm glad you found your remedial… I've never encountered such problems! I just installed python 3.3.2 and run convert-ly.py from the command-line - perfect! running python from a command line displays Python 3.3.2 … of course LilyPond uses its own version (there are several ways to do this) where is a dozing problem? Eluze -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Windows-registry-Python-and-LilyPond-tp150684p150722.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
David Kastrup gnu.org> writes: > Well yes, a thread is logically a _tree_. A chronological sort only > renders a list, and that's just not useful for tracking a particular > conversation to its start. FWIW, I receive the digest and when I want to reply to a message, I use gmane. It's slightly less convenient, but I consider it to be at least polite. As far as I know, it does handle the headers properly. http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.general Incidentally, if you look at recent posts via gmane, you'll see that the broken threads are totally obvious. hjh ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
film score example
Hi all - About a year ago, several of you answered questions of mine about notating a film score. I reached a stopping point with the first cue and learned a bit more about git, so I have the first film cue from the score up on github now: https://github.com/tunesmith/TheForgivingSea (pdf of score at: https://github.com/tunesmith/TheForgivingSea/blob/master/1M2/pdf/1M2.pdf ) The score was originally prepared (in Sibelius) a few years ago, under the tutelage of a professional hollywood film composer, Hummie Mann, and was performed/recorded by a volunteer orchestra, so it's been through several revisions to tighten it up. This project was to re-notate it in lilypond. It's also a simple, short score, so it might be useful for various learning purposes. I'm also more than happy to receive any suggestions or "pull requests" on how to improve the score or simplify the lilypond coding. Appended below is part of one of the README's - the "unexpected difficulties" I had with lilypond, as in the areas that didn't seem to work easily right away. (Note that I started this re-notation project as a complete lilypond beginner.) A big one here is "giant time signatures", which are common in film scores but don't seem to have a graceful solution in lilypond. Please note that these are just the (minor) complaints, and that overall I was *extremely* happy with the experience and output. I did this all in eclipse (elysium) on a 15" MacBook Pro and loved the "coding" experience. Thanks for all your help, I hope someone finds this useful! Curt ~^~^~^~^ Unexpectedly hard parts of creating this score (all specific to v2.16): - General spacing and staff sizes. I believe Lilypond by default puts everything too close together for music that is read by instrumentalists, particularly sight-readers. The spacing commands are easy to use, but difficult to find and look up if you don't already know them. - I make liberal use of "tagging" for part extraction. It appears this is the best way to handle minor differences between parts and full scores. - Hairpins are surprisingly difficult. Most instruments do not have a natural decay, so hairpins don't necessarily start or end right at the note boundaries. It's necessary to use "fake voices" in these cases. Even with this, it didn't support having a decrescendo end at the Fine bar - I had to make it end at a note value before the Fine bar. And if you have ties over these fake voices, you have to know about \set tieWaitForNote = ##t - Header text elements are a bit bearish to configure. Our instructions were to put the instrument name in the "upper left" of each part; I ended up using the out of the box "poet" slot, and then later reconfigured all of bookTitleMarkup to reposition "instrument" when it became clear I'd need the "instrument" slot for later pages. It also could be easier to put a simple newline in, for longer instrument names. - The alignment of the flat sign in text markup like "Clarinet in Bb" is difficult. I gave up on this one because the approach to make it look right felt too hard-coded. - The "\sustainOff" right-alignment looks bad to me. It should end at the barline or at the rest you stop pedaling; not right afterward. Pedaling usually implies you pedal for the duration of the note, but not longer. - It was difficult to figure out how to create a percussion staff where someone switched from a pitched instrument to a rhythm instrument. Also, I'm not quite convinced on the choice for a percussive half note- I've seen open-heads in these situations before, but I found it impossible to override the notehead in \drummode. - It was extremely hard to specify a subito dynamic right after a hairpin. This is a relatively common use-case, but I had to pull in a pretty complicated scheme function, and modify it, to make it work as expected. This one requirement probably took around six hours. - Making courtesy/cautionary accidentals show up in just the parts was a more verbose process than it needed to be, it seemed. I wasn't able to do this reliably unless I tagged the entire measure. The programmer in me wanted to just tag the cautionary accidental alone. - Fermatas were often misaligned, too close to or colliding with slurs. Manual padding was necessary. - In film scoring, it's common to include the information of the SMPTE timecode of when a last note in a cue gets cut off, for the instruments that are playing at that time. It was not possible to make a \markup element right-align with the final barline. This eventually required a few overrides to Sco
Re: Windows registry, Python, and LilyPond
Well, Microsoft has invented the side-by-side (SxS) installation years ago. I has been introduced for Windows XP. (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa376307.aspx) Although the name "assembly" suggests that it has to do with .NET CLR it is a plain DLL thing suitable for native C applications. While the SxS helps in the DLL hell you have to decide what program shall execute schripts of a specific language. It's tedious to add a hash-bang with the absolute path to the binary in front of any script file. So you need a mechanism to connect the type of script to an executable. That's done with the registry or even the PATH environment variable. When a program like python is already installed any change of the second installer affect the previous python installation. To circumvent the problem the installer would have to check if python is installed and ask the user if she wants to change the executing program (python) for the python scripts. Helge 2013/9/12 David Kastrup : > Hilary Snaden writes: > >> Nearly two years ago I wrote to this list commenting about major >> problems (including registry residue) resulting from trying to run >> Python 2, Python 3 and Lilypond on the same Windoze box. >> >> Since switching to GNU/Linux they've all got on just fine. Switching >> to GNU/Linux is one of the best things I've ever done with a computer. > > To be fair: that's not an inherent advantage of either GNU or Linux. It > is more a consequence of how a distribution or file system standard > organises the names and places of shared libraries and how a package > system drops things into place. Several different GNU/Linux systems do > that differently, and several BSD variants have their own ways of doing > things. That's not remarkable but rather solid engineering. > > The surprising thing is rather that Microsoft has not managed to bring > system management into a sane state for a single-vendor distribution, > leading to everybody and his dog tampering with the system in the > so-called DLL hell. > > -- > David Kastrup > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
