Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:39:20PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> David Kastrup writes:
>>
>> > Well, I've not been able to nicely redo the merges (git !@#$!#). So I
>> > just threw everything release-related out of staging. If you redo the
>> > merge into staging an
Michael Welsh Duggan writes:
> You want to look in the "Static Usage" node under "Rules".
I should have said "Static Usage" under "Static Pattern" under "Rules".
--
Michael Welsh Duggan
(m...@md5i.com)
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel
David Kastrup writes:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
>> 229e0282758104ae7fa2efe663d2a76da5a0f96d
>
> This one has
>
> +$(OUT_TXT_FILES): $(outdir)/%.txt: $(top-src-dir)/%
> + cp -f $< $@
> +
> +$(OUT_TXT_FILES:%.txt=%.html): $(outdir)/%.html: $(outdir)/%.txt
> + $(PYTHON) $(step-bindir)
Graham Percival writes:
> 229e0282758104ae7fa2efe663d2a76da5a0f96d
This one has
+$(OUT_TXT_FILES): $(outdir)/%.txt: $(top-src-dir)/%
+ cp -f $< $@
+
+$(OUT_TXT_FILES:%.txt=%.html): $(outdir)/%.html: $(outdir)/%.txt
+ $(PYTHON) $(step-bindir)/text2html.py $<
I don't understand those
Francisco Vila writes:
> 2011/12/23 David Kastrup :
>>> Anybody have ideas? At first glance it seems like somebody used a
>>> relative directory instead of doing it with $(top-src-dir).
>>
>> No idea. But the symptom would suggest that
>>
>> commit 77cfd9e80a9792737a8630ba3c3ecfb359950f9d
>> Au
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 02:05:22AM +0100, Francisco Vila wrote:
> 2011/12/23 David Kastrup :
> > No idea. But the symptom would suggest that
> >
> > commit 77cfd9e80a9792737a8630ba3c3ecfb359950f9d
> > Author: Francisco Vila
> > Date: Wed Dec 21 22:54:53 2011 +0100
> >
> > Web: remove web/ in
2011/12/23 David Kastrup :
>> Anybody have ideas? At first glance it seems like somebody used a
>> relative directory instead of doing it with $(top-src-dir).
>
> No idea. But the symptom would suggest that
>
> commit 77cfd9e80a9792737a8630ba3c3ecfb359950f9d
> Author: Francisco Vila
> Date: We
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:39:20PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> David Kastrup writes:
>>
>> > Well, I've not been able to nicely redo the merges (git !@#$!#). So I
>> > just threw everything release-related out of staging. If you redo the
>> > merge into staging an
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:39:20PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
> > Well, I've not been able to nicely redo the merges (git !@#$!#). So I
> > just threw everything release-related out of staging. If you redo the
> > merge into staging and the version number bump in stag
David Kastrup writes:
> Well, I've not been able to nicely redo the merges (git !@#$!#). So I
> just threw everything release-related out of staging. If you redo the
> merge into staging and the version number bump in staging, you should be
> fine.
>
> I made a slightly more complex fix in orde
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 07:19:55PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Graham Percival writes:
>>
>> > No problem; I'm quite happy that Patchy is pulling his weight so
>> > soon. :)
>>
>> Never mind Patchy... After the problematic commit, you made a release
>> tag and ev
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 07:19:55PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Graham Percival writes:
>>
>> > No problem; I'm quite happy that Patchy is pulling his weight so
>> > soon. :)
>>
>> Never mind Patchy... After the problematic commit, you made a release
>> tag and ev
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 07:19:55PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > No problem; I'm quite happy that Patchy is pulling his weight so
> > soon. :)
>
> Never mind Patchy... After the problematic commit, you made a release
> tag and everything. This is going to be one
Graham Percival writes:
> No problem; I'm quite happy that Patchy is pulling his weight so
> soon. :)
Never mind Patchy... After the problematic commit, you made a release
tag and everything. This is going to be one mess of a cleanup.
I propose that we don't actually release release/2.15.23-
David Kastrup writes:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 05:28:44PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Graham Percival writes:
>>>
>>> > Skimming through lily/GNUmakefile, this makes sense. There's a
>>> > couple of explicit dependencies for parser.hh, but these don't
>>> > m
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 05:28:44PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Graham Percival writes:
>>
>> > Skimming through lily/GNUmakefile, this makes sense. There's a
>> > couple of explicit dependencies for parser.hh, but these don't
>> > mention lily-lexer-scheme.cc, whic
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 05:28:44PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Skimming through lily/GNUmakefile, this makes sense. There's a
> > couple of explicit dependencies for parser.hh, but these don't
> > mention lily-lexer-scheme.cc, which is the file that triggers the
>
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 06:17:57AM -0800, Graham Percival wrote:
>> That order of commands suggests that lily-lexer-scheme.cc does not
>> depend on parser.cc. I see that it contains such an #include, so
>> I would assume that make would catch it... but apparently not.
>
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 06:17:57AM -0800, Graham Percival wrote:
> That order of commands suggests that lily-lexer-scheme.cc does not
> depend on parser.cc. I see that it contains such an #include, so
> I would assume that make would catch it... but apparently not.
Skimming through lily/GNUmakefi
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 01:35:27PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
> >> In file included from
> >> /home/jlowe/lilypond-git/lily/lily-lexer-scheme.cc:21:
> >> /home/jlowe/lilypond-git/lily/include/lily-lexer.hh:69: error: ISO C++
> >> forbids declaration of 'YYSTYPE' with n
David Kastrup writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> James writes:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> --snip--
>>>
>>> rm -f ./out/lilypond-version.dep;
>>> DEPENDENCIES_OUTPUT="./out/lilypond-version.dep
>>> ./out/lilypond-version.o" g++ -c -Woverloaded-virtual
>>> -I/usr/include/python2.6 -I/usr/include/pyt
David Kastrup writes:
> James writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> --snip--
>>
>> rm -f ./out/lilypond-version.dep;
>> DEPENDENCIES_OUTPUT="./out/lilypond-version.dep
>> ./out/lilypond-version.o" g++ -c -Woverloaded-virtual
>> -I/usr/include/python2.6 -I/usr/include/python2.6 -fno-strict-aliasing
>> -g -f
David Kastrup writes:
> James writes:
>
>> rm -f ./out/lilypond-version.dep;
>> DEPENDENCIES_OUTPUT="./out/lilypond-version.dep
>> ./out/lilypond-version.o" g++ -c -Woverloaded-virtual
>> -I/usr/include/python2.6 -I/usr/include/python2.6 -fno-strict-aliasing
>> -g -fwrapv -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -
James writes:
> Hello,
>
> --snip--
>
> rm -f ./out/lilypond-version.dep;
> DEPENDENCIES_OUTPUT="./out/lilypond-version.dep
> ./out/lilypond-version.o" g++ -c -Woverloaded-virtual
> -I/usr/include/python2.6 -I/usr/include/python2.6 -fno-strict-aliasing
> -g -fwrapv -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DNDEBUG
Hello,
--snip--
rm -f ./out/lilypond-version.dep;
DEPENDENCIES_OUTPUT="./out/lilypond-version.dep
./out/lilypond-version.o" g++ -c -Woverloaded-virtual
-I/usr/include/python2.6 -I/usr/include/python2.6 -fno-strict-aliasing
-g -fwrapv -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DNDEBUG
-I/home/jlowe/lilypond-git/lily/
25 matches
Mail list logo
