Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'm attempting a fix now.
Done; here is the patch:
I've verified that this works completely, producing a nice happy
looking pbm output file.
Thomas
I've uploaded a 1.1.17 release with your fix.
Many thanks for
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm attempting a fix now.
Done; here is the patch:
--- /home/debian/mftrace-1.1.16/gf2pbm.c 2005-10-15 13:57:58.0 -0700
+++ /home/src/mftrace-1.1.16/gf2pbm.c 2005-10-15 14:23:49.0 -0700
@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@
ubyte cmnd;
int min_
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>Ah, I have found the problem. The Debian package builds gf2pbm with
>>>optimization on (-O2). gf2pbm misbehaves when compiled with
>>>optimization, and works fine wh
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ah, I have found the problem. The Debian package builds gf2pbm with
optimization on (-O2). gf2pbm misbehaves when compiled with
optimization, and works fine when compiled without.
More specifically, failure happens
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ah, I have found the problem. The Debian package builds gf2pbm with
> optimization on (-O2). gf2pbm misbehaves when compiled with
> optimization, and works fine when compiled without.
More specifically, failure happens with:
-fschedule-insns -f
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>This is almost certainly not a compiler bug, of course, it's much more
>l
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>>>
This is almost certainly not a compiler bug, of course, it's much more
likely a problem inside gf2pbm.
>>>
>>> Aha, GCC spews some
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
This is almost certainly not a compiler bug, of course, it's much more
likely a problem inside gf2pbm.
Aha, GCC spews some warnings about dubitable pointer manipulations.
Which GCC version i
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> This is almost certainly not a compiler bug, of course, it's much more
>> likely a problem inside gf2pbm.
>
> Aha, GCC spews some warnings about dubitable pointer manipulations.
> Which GCC version is this?
4.0.2.
Thom
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
This is almost certainly not a compiler bug, of course, it's much more
likely a problem inside gf2pbm.
Aha, GCC spews some warnings about dubitable pointer manipulations.
Which GCC version is this?
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~h
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Hrmmph. Is this still an mftrace problem (does mftrace cmr10
>>> produce a .pfa which looks good in fontforge?)
>> Alas, no. I get no glyphs, and the output of mftrace
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Hrmmph. Is this still an mftrace problem (does mftrace cmr10
>>> produce a .pfa which looks good in fontforge?)
>> Alas, no. I get no glyphs, and the output of mftrace
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hrmmph. Is this still an mftrace problem (does mftrace cmr10 produce a
.pfa which looks good in fontforge?)
Alas, no. I get no glyphs, and the output of mftrace is as follows.
BTW, there is presumably a missing "\n" o
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hrmmph. Is this still an mftrace problem (does mftrace cmr10 produce a
> .pfa which looks good in fontforge?)
Alas, no. I get no glyphs, and the output of mftrace is as follows.
BTW, there is presumably a missing "\n" on one of these printfs.
Tho
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
I'm using mftrace version 1.1.12, and potrace version 1.7. Autotrace
version 0.31.1 is also installed, but mftrace says it uses potrace if
both are there. mftrace also uses t1asm, which is ve
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> I'm using mftrace version 1.1.12, and potrace version 1.7. Autotrace
>> version 0.31.1 is also installed, but mftrace says it uses potrace if
>> both are there. mftrace also uses t1asm, which is version 1.32.
>
> Upgrad
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>> I'm using mftrace version 1.1.12
> Upgrade mftrace to 1.1.16
Hmm, lilypond-2.6 still has
STEPMAKE_PROGS(MFTRACE, mftrace, REQUIRED, 1.1.1)
should this be bumped?
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> I'm using mftrace version 1.1.12, and potrace version 1.7. Autotrace
>> version 0.31.1 is also installed, but mftrace says it uses potrace if
>> both are there. mftrace also uses t1asm, which is version 1.32.
>
> Upgrad
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
I'm using mftrace version 1.1.12, and potrace version 1.7. Autotrace
version 0.31.1 is also installed, but mftrace says it uses potrace if
both are there. mftrace also uses t1asm, which is version 1.32.
Upgrade mftrace to 1.1.16
I don't know much of anything abo
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> from codepoint E100 onward, you should see isolated rests, accidentals
> and noteheads in the glyph table.
Well, it's no surprise that I didn't see anything!
Making progress here; clearly something is busted in font generation.
The fontforge call
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What are the "emmentaler" glyphs? I know music, but I don't know how
>> to recognize what I should see.
>
> gnome-character-map
> view > unicode block
> font : emmentaler
> block: private unicode area
>
> from codepoint E100 onward, you should see
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> input/example-1.ly:4:16: warning: note head `noteheads.s2' not found
>
> (combing from note-head.cc line 65), it doesn't contain the correct glyph.
>
> If you want to analyze the problem, you could trace into
> fm->find_by_name(idx) a few lines befo
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
input/example-1.ly:4:16: warning: note head `noteheads.s2' not found
(combing from note-head.cc line 65), it doesn't contain the correct glyph.
If you want to analyze the problem, you could trace into
fm->find_by_name(i
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Have you built and run it on a powerpc Linux system? Running what
Not for a while. We run it on MacOS X (ppc) though.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
___
lilypond-devel mailing
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you want to analyze the problem, you could trace into
> fm->find_by_name(idx) a few lines before using gdb. It might be a
> compatibility problem with freetype. Do the emmentaler glyphs show up in
> gnome-character-map if you install the .otf i
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>can you do
>>>
>>> export LILYPONDPREFIX=
>>> lily/out/lilypond input/example-1
>>>
>>> this should give the same errors.
>> Indeed it does (though without the infinite
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
can you do
export LILYPONDPREFIX=
lily/out/lilypond input/example-1
this should give the same errors.
Indeed it does (though without the infinite loop).
Can you post what
lily/out/lilypond --verbose input/exam
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> can you do
>
> export LILYPONDPREFIX=
> lily/out/lilypond input/example-1
>
> this should give the same errors.
Indeed it does (though without the infinite loop).
> Can you post what
>
> lily/out/lilypond --verbose input/example-1
>
> says?
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Lilypond 2.6.3 does not build on powerpc.
"make all" works fine, but "make web" fails.
The specific error happens while building the documentation thus:
can you do
export LILYPONDPREFIX=
lily/out/lilypond input/example-1
this should give the same errors. Can
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Lilypond 2.6.3 does not build on powerpc.
>> "make all" works fine, but "make web" fails.
>> The specific error happens while building the documentation thus:
>>
>
> looks like something went wrong building the fonts. You
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Lilypond 2.6.3 does not build on powerpc.
"make all" works fine, but "make web" fails.
The specific error happens while building the documentation thus:
looks like something went wrong building the fonts. You do have
mf/out/emmentaler*otf ?
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys
Lilypond 2.6.3 does not build on powerpc.
"make all" works fine, but "make web" fails.
The specific error happens while building the documentation thus:
one
Description: Binary data
(These last two lines then get printed forever in an apparent infinite
loop.)
The contents of the lily-177087
32 matches
Mail list logo
