On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 4:09 PM Dan Eble wrote:
> On Aug 7, 2020, at 18:56, Thomas Morley wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just did `make -j5 CPU_COUNT=5` with some experimental patch on top
> > of current master.
> > It failed with
> > lilypond-book.py: error: file not found:
> > single-staff-templa
I saw this earlier, and I fixed it somewhere, but can't find it now.
IIRC, it is a missing dependency on the snippet generation in the doc
build.
On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 12:57 AM Thomas Morley
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just did `make -j5 CPU_COUNT=5` with some experimental patch on top
> of current mast
Hi Harm and Dan,
There were several changes to lilypond-book in the past weeks,
including my Python cleanup; as it just turned out in another thread
that it contained a bug, I’m concerned the failure could be my fault.
I only have a web browser at the moment. Is the problem reprodu
On Aug 7, 2020, at 18:56, Thomas Morley wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I just did `make -j5 CPU_COUNT=5` with some experimental patch on top
> of current master.
> It failed with
> lilypond-book.py: error: file not found:
> single-staff-template-with-notes-and-lyrics.ly
> This file _is_ present, I checked t
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
On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 09:27:27PM +0100, Marc Hohl wrote:
> I think that commit a61ab84e86b209fe11d63ec488e02525b7481b5b
> causes 'make all' to fail with
Indeed. Fixed now, I believe.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gn
Here is a working ebuild
jusage:
cp lilypond-2.5.20.ebuild /usr/portage/media-sound/lilypond
cd /usr/portage/media-sound/lilypond
ebuild lilypond-2.5.20.ebuild digest
emerge lilypond
Don't know why... it complained me once about bad digest... if this happens
repeat last two steps
Happy compili
Alle 11:32, lunedì 18 aprile 2005, Mats Bengtsson ha scritto:
> it's a pity that Gentoo lists 2.5.2 as the latest.
Gentoo is a great updated distro, lilypond maintainer should relase ebuilds
more often.
Marco
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond
It seems that mftrace 1.1.2 is newer than LilyPond 2.5.2 and that
the flags to mftrace have been changed in between. Send a complaint
to the Gentoo maintainer.
The easiest solution is probably to change the lines in the file
/stepmake/stepmake/metafont-rules.make according to the diff shown
in
http
On Sunday 07 November 2004 19.11, Karl Hammar wrote:
>
> I have been able to reproduce your problem and I suggest you install
> potrace:
>
> # apt-get install potrace
Thanks! it makes nicely now.
erik
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using debian/testing.
>
> make output with 2.4 cvs of make clean; ./autogen.sh; make:
>
> []
> FontForge used to be named PfaEdit.
>
> mv feta-braces-g.pfa ./out
> mftrace --encoding feta-braces-h.enc -I ./out/ --pfa --simplify feta-braces-h
> sh:
Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> buggy fontforge ; upgrade it.
>
> OK - Pedro, how do you get around this? I use version 0.0.20041012-1, which
> is
> the latest both in testing and unstable.
or downgrade it, I have 0.0.20040824-1 and never had a problem. maybe
the bug was introduced
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Saturday 06 November 2004 21.46, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > Simplifying font... Copyright (c) 2000-2004 by George Williams.
> > > Executable based on sources from 07:34 12-Oct-2004.
> > > FontForge used to be named PfaEdit.
> > > erro
On Saturday 06 November 2004 21.46, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Simplifying font... Copyright (c) 2000-2004 by George Williams.
> > Executable based on sources from 07:34 12-Oct-2004.
> > FontForge used to be named PfaEdit.
> > error: fontforge: command exited with valu
Fixed in cvs.
Carl Sorensen
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Run "make clean" before "make".
/Mats
Carl Sorensen wrote:
"make", "make all", and "make install" all fail on the current CVS.
The following error appears.
make[1]: Entering directory
`/home/carl/lilypond/current-cvs/lilypond/lily'
cp -p /home/carl/lilypond/current-cvs/lilypond/config.hh out/con
39 matches
Mail list logo
