Le mardi 26 février 2008 à 11:50 -0800, Graham Percival a écrit : > On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:53:50 +0100 > John Mandereau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Le lundi 25 f__vrier 2008 __ 18:13 -0800, Graham Percival a __crit : > > > I have reverted the automatic-version-number patch in order to > > > continue working on the docs. Please do NOT re-apply this > > > patch until you are certain it works with GUB doc-building.
I retored it in my branch, and I'll double test before merging into master. > I'm using texinfo 4.11, and I just checked and couldn't see a 4.12. > What version are you using? 4.11-3 from Fedora 8 updates, but we use a copy of texinfo.tex in the sources to build all LilyPond docs. I just updated texinfo.tex in my branch, I'll test it along with other changes. > convert-ly most definitely *does* update the version numbers. Not _all_ version numbers, e.g. lilypond-book version number -- see lilypond-book.itely, "An example of a musicological document", the version number is still 2.11.37. We could go on updating such numbers by hand, but IMHO adding this @version macro is not so hard and solves this for ever, it only needs more testing (yes, I really tested all @version stuff with a clean build, I just not tested with external_binary). > This does solve another problem, though: the templates (with LSR-import) > don't have any version numbers, so we might be able to use this to > add version numbers to them. The @version macro I wanted to add is pure Texinfo, so we can't use it directly for ly snippets. Lilypond-book avatar used for building docs is not compiled and thus is not aware of LilyPond version, so we can't ask lilypond-book to interpret @version either. Version numbers are already present in some ly snippets, in fundamental.itely; as we can't add \version to snippets in LSR database, we could add them in makelsr.py only for templates. Cheers, John _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
