2008/11/13 Mark Polesky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Now that I think of it, why was the default midi-
> extension changed on Windows in the first place?
It came about as a result of this thread:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2008-05/msg00255.html
Regards,
Neil
2008/11/13 Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> You mean .mid instead of .midi on Windows!
Yes indeed :-)
Cheers,
Valentin
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Valentin Villenave wrote:
2008/11/12 Mark Polesky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
One small issue I'd like to raise is that Windows users
running LilyPond with the jEdit/LilyPondTool package
can't play the MIDI file *WITHIN* jEdit while the
extension is .mid
[Fwding to Bertalan.]
This was mod
Valentin Villenave wrote:
> This was modified in LilyPond 2.11.60; Windows users
> do now have .mid files instead of .mid (while the
> default extension remains .midi for other operating
> systems).
Huh? My version of jEdit/LilyPondTool on Windows won't
play .mid files, only .midi files. And ac
On 12.11.2008 (05:14), Graham Percival wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 11:12:11PM -0800, Mark Polesky wrote:
> > Currently, "a few interesting options" are listed
> > with a mention of -dhelp to show the rest. Why not
> > list them all?
>
> Because they change relatively often and are advanced op
2008/11/12 Mark Polesky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> One small issue I'd like to raise is that Windows users
> running LilyPond with the jEdit/LilyPondTool package
> can't play the MIDI file *WITHIN* jEdit while the
> extension is .mid
[Fwding to Bertalan.]
This was modified in LilyPond 2.11.60; Windo
Graham Percival wrote:
>
> > Currently, "a few interesting options" are listed
> > with a mention of -dhelp to show the rest. Why not
> > list them all?
>
> Because they change relatively often and are advanced
> options anyway. People who should be using -dsomething
> can run -dhelp to find
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 11:12:11PM -0800, Mark Polesky wrote:
> Currently, "a few interesting options" are listed
> with a mention of -dhelp to show the rest. Why not
> list them all?
Because they change relatively often and are advanced options
anyway. People who should be using -dsomething can
Dvlprs,
All --define options should be listed in AU 3.2.2.
Currently, "a few interesting options" are listed
with a mention of -dhelp to show the rest. Why not
list them all?
If anyone is worried about cluttering up the page,
the options could be listed on a different page,
accessible by a link
