Graham Percival wrote Saturday, September 12, 2009 12:00 AM
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 11:16:28PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
The change from 160\mm to 5\in shortens the line
by around 33\mm, which wrecks at least one
example
It was not deliberate to change the docs lnie-width.
I that case I'd like to change it back.
It appears to be a side effect of some other
change to lilypond-book, which I suspect now
picks up 'smallbook' rather than 'A4' for ly
fragments.
I'll try to track it down when I have a bit
more time to do a binary search, unless someone
else has a idea what might have caused this.
In the meantime I'll add line-width to the
@lilypond command for the broken fragment in
LM 5.4.3 with a comment. As this fragment
relies on the line-width being above a certain
value that is probably sensible anyway.
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
