(please CC to bug-lilypond. I'm just a bug administrator.)
It seems that you are using lilypond v2.2.6 to compile the scores. You need to
make sure that 2.4.3 & all its directories are used (run lilypond --version
to test). I don't know exactly how to do this on your system, but if you
can't fi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hello,
>
> In several prominent parts of the lilypond web:
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.5/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Engraving.html#Engraving
> http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/introduction.html
> one reads that the sharp lines and mechanical l
Hello,
In several prominent parts of the lilypond web:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.5/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Engraving.html#Engraving
http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/introduction.html
one reads that the sharp lines and mechanical layout of Henle
editions are "typical
Michael Kallas wrote:
Barcheck is really great, yes, but I've found some times it fails when it
shouldn't.
Try for example:
\time 4/4
r4 R4*3 |
This fails reproduceably in 2.4.2 (or am I coding nonsense here)?
As has already been pointed out by others, your example doesn't really
make sense, sinc
Seems like a bug to me!
Example:
\version "2.4.2"
\relative c' {
\repeat volta 2 {c d e16 f } e f g4 |
}
/Mats
Erik Ronström wrote:
According to the regression tests, LilyPond does not typeset beams
across manual repeat signs. That is true. However, it does place beams
across repeat-voltas, if t
