Re: Issue 5656: Warn about accessing the Global context explicitly (issue 567050043 by nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com)

Reviewers: thomasmorley651, Message: On 2020/01/09 00:33:35, thomasmorley651 wrote: I know several custom codings (defining a new grob, thus the need to reintroduce all-grob-descriptions at Global level) using \layout { \context { \Global \grobdescriptions #all-grob-description

Issue 5656: Warn about accessing the Global context explicitly (issue 567050043 by nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com)

I know several custom codings (defining a new grob, thus the need to reintroduce all-grob-descriptions at Global level) using \layout { \context { \Global \grobdescriptions #all-grob-descriptions } } will this be disallowed with this patch? Then I'd object. If it stays allowed, why

Re: macOS 64-bit

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 2:59 PM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 08.01.2020, 14:23 -0500 schrieb Marnen Laibow-Koser: > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 2:12 PM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: [...] > > > > I think GUB just downloads a pre-built version of LilyPad, see the spec > > > https://gith

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 20:46:37, dak wrote: On 2020/01/08 20:30:20, hahnjo wrote: > On 2020/01/08 20:14:20, dak wrote: > > On 2020/01/08 19:49:22, hahnjo wrote: > > > On 2020/01/08 19:40:06, c_sorensen wrote: > > > > How about > > > > > > > > AC_INIT([LilyPond],m4_esyscmd(echo `VERSION.AC')) > > > > > > >

Re: The Future

On Jan 8, 2020, at 12:53, Zone Dremik wrote: > > I'm bound to ask; is this the end of for support of Mac OS? I suggest checking the lilypond-devel archive, where people have been discussing macOS this very day. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2020-01/msg00052.html — Dan

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 20:30:20, hahnjo wrote: On 2020/01/08 20:14:20, dak wrote: > On 2020/01/08 19:49:22, hahnjo wrote: > > On 2020/01/08 19:40:06, c_sorensen wrote: > > > How about > > > > > > AC_INIT([LilyPond],m4_esyscmd(echo `VERSION.AC')) > > > > > > The documentation says it is permissible to use

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 1/8/20, 1:30 PM, "jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com" wrote: looks like I confused / misunderstood some other page... BTW, I neglected earlier to thank you for diving in and removing cruft from the stepmake and autoconf files. That's an important job that I don't really have the cho

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 20:14:20, dak wrote: On 2020/01/08 19:49:22, hahnjo wrote: > On 2020/01/08 19:40:06, c_sorensen wrote: > > How about > > > > AC_INIT([LilyPond],m4_esyscmd(echo `VERSION.AC')) > > > > The documentation says it is permissible to use m4_esyscmd as part of the > > package information

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

What documentation says AC_INIT should be called with constant arguments? Quoting from https://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.67/html_node/Initializing-configure.html "The arguments of AC_INIT must be static, i.e., there should not be any shell computation, quotes, or newlines,

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 19:49:22, hahnjo wrote: On 2020/01/08 19:40:06, c_sorensen wrote: > How about > > AC_INIT([LilyPond],m4_esyscmd(echo `VERSION.AC')) > > The documentation says it is permissible to use m4_esyscmd as part of the > package information strings in AC_INIT. > > Carl Not quite, but a

Re: macOS 64-bit

Am Mittwoch, den 08.01.2020, 14:23 -0500 schrieb Marnen Laibow-Koser: > > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 2:12 PM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, den 08.01.2020, 13:29 -0500 schrieb Marnen Laibow-Koser: > > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:21 PM Marnen Laibow-Koser < > > > mar...@marnen.org > > > > >

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 19:40:06, c_sorensen wrote: How about AC_INIT([LilyPond],m4_esyscmd(echo `VERSION.AC')) The documentation says it is permissible to use m4_esyscmd as part of the package information strings in AC_INIT. Carl Not quite, but a variation seems to work. However I find this s

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

How about AC_INIT([LilyPond],m4_esyscmd(echo `VERSION.AC')) The documentation says it is permissible to use m4_esyscmd as part of the package information strings in AC_INIT. Carl On 1/8/20, 11:49 AM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of d...@gnu.org" wrote: On 2020/01/08 18:03:36, dak wrote:

Re: macOS 64-bit

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 2:12 PM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 08.01.2020, 13:29 -0500 schrieb Marnen Laibow-Koser: > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:21 PM Marnen Laibow-Koser < > > mar...@marnen.org > > > > > wrote: [...] > > > course doesn't contain the LilyPond binaries. Does anyone kno

Re: macOS 64-bit

Am Mittwoch, den 08.01.2020, 13:29 -0500 schrieb Marnen Laibow-Koser: > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:21 PM Marnen Laibow-Koser < > mar...@marnen.org > > > wrote: > [...] > > > I plan to use LilyPad like the current Mac distributions do. I agree that > > Frescobaldi might be a better choice in the lon

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 18:03:36, dak wrote: > > But re-reading your question, you're maybe proposing to have a file that is > included by Autoconf when generating configure? I think that's not possible with > the documented functionality of Autoconf because you can only do very few things > before

Re: macOS 64-bit

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:21 PM Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote: [...] > > I plan to use LilyPad like the current Mac distributions do. I agree that > Frescobaldi might be a better choice in the long run. > I got LilyPad to build 64-bit (and run on Mojave), with some modifications to the existing code

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 18:09:53, hahnjo wrote: On 2020/01/08 18:03:36, dak wrote: > On 2020/01/08 17:48:36, hahnjo wrote: > > On 2020/01/08 16:43:24, dak wrote: > > > mailto:jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com writes: > > > > > > > Reviewers: dak, > > > > > > > > Message: > > > > On 2020/01/08 16:18:25, dak wrote: >

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 18:03:36, dak wrote: On 2020/01/08 17:48:36, hahnjo wrote: > On 2020/01/08 16:43:24, dak wrote: > > mailto:jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com writes: > > > > > Reviewers: dak, > > > > > > Message: > > > On 2020/01/08 16:18:25, dak wrote: > > >> https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/5

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 17:48:36, hahnjo wrote: On 2020/01/08 16:43:24, dak wrote: > mailto:jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com writes: > > > Reviewers: dak, > > > > Message: > > On 2020/01/08 16:18:25, dak wrote: > >> https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/581410043/configure.ac > >> File configure.ac (righ

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

On 2020/01/08 16:43:24, dak wrote: mailto:jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com writes: > Reviewers: dak, > > Message: > On 2020/01/08 16:18:25, dak wrote: >> https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/581410043/configure.ac >> File configure.ac (right): > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043

Cleanup unneeded parts of Stepmake (issue 577280043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

LGTM, thanks! https://codereview.appspot.com/577280043/

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com writes: > Reviewers: dak, > > Message: > On 2020/01/08 16:18:25, dak wrote: >> https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/581410043/configure.ac >> File configure.ac (right): > > > https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/581410043/configure.ac#newcode7 >> configur

Re: Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

Reviewers: dak, Message: On 2020/01/08 16:18:25, dak wrote: https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/581410043/configure.ac File configure.ac (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/581410043/configure.ac#newcode7 configure.ac:7: AC_INIT([LilyPond], [2.21.0], mailto:[bug

Cleanup initialization of configure process (issue 549350043 by jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com)

https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/581410043/configure.ac File configure.ac (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/549350043/diff/581410043/configure.ac#newcode7 configure.ac:7: AC_INIT([LilyPond], [2.21.0], [bug-lilyp...@gnu.org], [lilypond], [http://lilypond.org/]) Hardwiring the

Re: Status of Guile 2.0 Support (Next Debian release won't ship guile-1.8)

Right, so we’re sticking with 1.8 for now. Have we ever considered throwing out Guile and replacing it with something else? (Yes, I know that would be a huge operation.) Erlend > On 8 Jan 2020, at 13:29, David Kastrup wrote: > > Erlend Aasland writes: > >> Hey, guys! What’s the status of G

Re: Status of Guile 2.0 Support (Next Debian release won't ship guile-1.8)

I understand. Thanks for your answers. Erlend > On 8 Jan 2020, at 13:51, David Kastrup wrote: > > Erlend Aasland writes: > >> Right, so we’re sticking with 1.8 for now. Have we ever considered >> throwing out Guile and replacing it with something else? (Yes, I know >> that would be a huge op

Re: Status of Guile 2.0 Support (Next Debian release won't ship guile-1.8)

Hey, guys! What’s the status of Guile support in LilyPond? Is there still a transition from Guile 1.8 to 2.0 happening, or has 2.0 been ditched in favour of 2.2? I did a quick search in the bugtracker, and there seem to be people

Re: Status of Guile 2.0 Support (Next Debian release won't ship guile-1.8)

Erlend Aasland writes: > Right, so we’re sticking with 1.8 for now. Have we ever considered > throwing out Guile and replacing it with something else? (Yes, I know > that would be a huge operation.) Replacing Scheme with something else would be a completely different application. Using a differ

Re: Status of Guile 2.0 Support (Next Debian release won't ship guile-1.8)

Erlend Aasland writes: > Hey, guys! What’s the status of Guile support in LilyPond? Is there > still a transition from Guile 1.8 to 2.0 happening, or has 2.0 been > ditched in favour of 2.2? I did a quick search in the > bugtracker,

Re: Fix a few complaints in python/convertrules.py (issue 583290043 by d...@gnu.org)

https://codereview.appspot.com/583290043/diff/557180043/python/convertrules.py File python/convertrules.py (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/583290043/diff/557180043/python/convertrules.py#newcode3973 python/convertrules.py:3973: if re.search (r"#(banter|jazz)-chordnames", str): On 2020/0

Fix a few complaints in python/convertrules.py (issue 583290043 by d...@gnu.org)

https://codereview.appspot.com/583290043/diff/557180043/python/convertrules.py File python/convertrules.py (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/583290043/diff/557180043/python/convertrules.py#newcode1774 python/convertrules.py:1774: str += "'" * (o + 1) I agree that this is equivalent, but s