Re: lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-29 Thread David Kastrup
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:13 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> Well, I am currently in the process of running make info (similar to >> make doc), and this is totally silly. >> >> In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go.  Instead, Lilypond >> is run _once_ for al

Re: lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-27 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
If you can do without lybookdb, it would be a more robust although less scalable design. I am not sure how intricate batching all of the png/pdf/eps generation is, we should probably decide after seeing the code that implements it. Lilypond being dominated by eps/png/pdf generation, and EPS/PDF g

Re: lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-27 Thread David Kastrup
Reinhold Kainhofer writes: > Am 2011-10-26 17:13, schrieb David Kastrup: >> Well, I am currently in the process of running make info (similar to >> make doc), and this is totally silly. >> >> In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go. Instead, Lilypond >> is run _once_ for all snippet

Re: lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-27 Thread Reinhold Kainhofer
Am 2011-10-26 17:13, schrieb David Kastrup: Well, I am currently in the process of running make info (similar to make doc), and this is totally silly. In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go. Instead, Lilypond is run _once_ for all snippets of a lybook source, Lilypond is current

Re: lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-27 Thread David Kastrup
Graham Percival writes: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 07:25:19AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> Graham Percival writes: >> >> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 05:13:56PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> >> >> >> In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go. Instead, Lilypond >> >> is run _once_ fo

Re: lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-26 Thread Graham Percival
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 07:25:19AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival writes: > > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 05:13:56PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > >> > >> In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go. Instead, Lilypond > >> is run _once_ for all snippets of a lybook source,

Re: lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-26 Thread David Kastrup
Graham Percival writes: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 05:13:56PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> >> In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go. Instead, Lilypond >> is run _once_ for all snippets of a lybook source, generating _one_ >> PostScript file. > > ... so instead of only generating

Re: lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-26 Thread Graham Percival
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 05:13:56PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > > In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go. Instead, Lilypond > is run _once_ for all snippets of a lybook source, generating _one_ > PostScript file. ... so instead of only generating snippets it needs, you want to gen

lybook-db etc etc.

2011-10-26 Thread David Kastrup
Well, I am currently in the process of running make info (similar to make doc), and this is totally silly. In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go. Instead, Lilypond is run _once_ for all snippets of a lybook source, generating _one_ PostScript file. Then GhostScript is run _once_