I have no special preference as to where the resource list lives, just that
it be linked from the lilypond pages and be a single source convenient and
visible to Lilyponders.
Generally what John has done at wiki looks good. New to me, so I don't know
what is possible.
So far the content is mostl
On 20 Aug 2005, at 21:01, Erik Sandberg wrote:
2. When there is no good page break (such as in orchestral scores),
no effort
should be done to find the 'optimal' one, we should just be greedy
(this can
of course be done)
The book by Alfred Blatter, "Instrumentation/Orchestration", p. 18,
Graham Percival wrote:
On 19-Aug-05, at 11:18 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Index: lilypond/ly/bagpipe.ly
diff -u lilypond/ly/bagpipe.ly:1.3 lilypond/ly/bagpipe.ly:1.4
% Layout tweaks.
+%{
+
+% WTF is this? --hwn
\layout {
\context {
\Voice
@@ -63,6 +66,8 @@
\tieUp
}
}
Do
On Thursday 18 August 2005 14.13, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Erik Sandberg wrote:
> > Did you try \pageBreak? :) IMHO, perfect page breaks is one of the things
> > that
>
> \pageBreak, did we have that? :-)
>
> Yes, I tried, but I thought it was a lot of hassle. It would ease up
> things if lily pro
Laura Conrad writes:
> JN> Please test.
>
> Same problem. Log attached.
How odd. I compiled and tested on debian/unstable. Can you make sure
that there are no guile leftovers, and reinstall guile, or something
like that?
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GNU LilyPond - The
> "JN" == Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JN> Laura Conrad writes:
>> Is there anyone with a working 2.6.3 on Debian unstable? And if so,
>> how did you get it?
JN> I've built a new autopackage for 2.6.3 using autopackage-1.0.6, with
JN> statically linked li
Hi Graham, hi Erik,
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005, Graham Percival wrote:
>
> On 19-Aug-05, at 5:10 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > when I ran lily 2.5.?, it produced a PDF of 50 kB. Now, I upgraded (which
> > forced me to update almost every package on my system), and it produces a
> > PDF of 510 k
Pedro Kröger wrote:
So, maybe sponsored features can be one of the business models for
lilypond and I think we should go for it (I mean, make it more
evident). But How about start a campaign anyway? something like "we need
your help to keep lilypond development going, please donate any
amount". I
It may be the new point-and-click system. Or some font subsetting problem.
Bert
Johannes Schindelin írta:
Hi,
when I ran lily 2.5.?, it produced a PDF of 50 kB. Now, I upgraded (which
forced me to update almost every package on my system), and it produces a
PDF of 510 kB. Granted, it looks
On 19-Aug-05, at 11:18 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Index: lilypond/ly/bagpipe.ly
diff -u lilypond/ly/bagpipe.ly:1.3 lilypond/ly/bagpipe.ly:1.4
% Layout tweaks.
+%{
+
+% WTF is this? --hwn
\layout {
\context {
\Voice
@@ -63,6 +66,8 @@
\tieUp
}
}
Do you mean "WTF doesn't this
On Saturday 20 August 2005 02.10, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when I ran lily 2.5.?, it produced a PDF of 50 kB. Now, I upgraded (which
> forced me to update almost every package on my system), and it produces a
> PDF of 510 kB. Granted, it looks nicer. But it's 10x bigger! Any ideas why
>
Laura Conrad writes:
> Is there anyone with a working 2.6.3 on Debian unstable? And if so,
> how did you get it?
I've built a new autopackage for 2.6.3 using autopackage-1.0.6, with
statically linked libstdc++ and glibc.
Please test.
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GNU LilyP
On 19-Aug-05, at 5:10 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
when I ran lily 2.5.?, it produced a PDF of 50 kB. Now, I upgraded
(which
forced me to update almost every package on my system), and it
produces a
PDF of 510 kB. Granted, it looks nicer. But it's 10x bigger! Any ideas
why
this is so?
It
CVS ChangeLog 1.4046 ('release commit') compiles fine but 'make
web' (following 'make web-clean') exits like so:
lily-785851645 lily-2020761040 lily-1385065150 lily-1184862009
lily-1101277944 lily-1929421955 lily-902420445 lily-1185060279
lily-700789500 lily-1662559184 lily-1386446995 lily-948541
14 matches
Mail list logo
