On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> > > lilypond-book in 2.2 will not choke on long files, if you break them
> > > in parts using \include. Why do you need extra features, then?
>
> Can you provide an example of a file that chokes 2.2 lilypond-book ?
I tested files of up to 1 MB is size
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > then used "xyzzy" as the basename for the whole process (.ly .tex .dvi
> > > .eps .png etc). This patch saved my project, since python was choking on
> > > the size of my source file. I had to break it into smaller pieces for
> >
> > lilypond-book in 2.2 will not c
On Mon, 31 May 2004, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I was able to fix this in lilypond-book-2.0.1 with the patch below. It
> > then used "xyzzy" as the basename for the whole process (.ly .tex .dvi
> > .eps .png etc). This patch saved my project, since python was choking
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I was able to fix this in lilypond-book-2.0.1 with the patch below. It
> then used "xyzzy" as the basename for the whole process (.ly .tex .dvi
> .eps .png etc). This patch saved my project, since python was choking on
> the size of my source file. I had to break it i
lilypond-book version 2.0 had a fragment option called filename="xyzzy".
Unfortunately, all this option did was to rename the lily-*.ly file to
xyzzy.ly, while the .png, etc files (which I would consider the important
ones, since they are the final results) are still referred to with random
number
lilypond-bood version 2.0 had a fragment option called filename="xyzzy".
Unfortunately, all this option did was to rename the lily-*.ly file to
xyzzy.ly, while the .png, etc files (which I would consider the
important ones, since they are the final results) are still referred to
with random numb
