Am 22.05.2012 01:15, schrieb Colin Hall:
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 11:07:05PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
I think I stumbled over a bit of misleading or wrong information in the NR.
I agree. I had a look and found issue 391 entitled using relative filepath in \include
foo.ly
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=391
It looks like this was fixed in 2009 and released in the 2.12.x series.
Ah, that might explain something.
I somehow was convinced that it isn't possible to reference include
files this way and was therefore quite surprised to see that it actually
is ...
Please have a look at the following documentation suggestion and
incorporate it into the NR if you find it correct:
I haven't tested it but going by the issue tracker your suggestion
makes sense. Thanks very much for doing a thorough job.
I forgot to mention that I _have_ tested the following:
main file includes sub1/includeOne.ily
includeOne.ily contains the include-relative directive and includes
sub2/includeTwo.ily (which is sub1/sub2/includeTwo.ily relative to
the main input file.
Best
Urs
See new documentation tracker:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2558
Thanks
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
