Guys, I broke git master by accidentally pushing fb964a541b56576fd929739e36835ac9bd0de2b9 , which I was still reviewing. I'm testing a fix for those problems right now.
However, while investigating the problem, I've discovered that if a doc build fails, a second doc build (after modifying the file *and* touching the main texi file) doesn't regenerate the @lilypond if you've only changed the [options]. I remember that we changed the comparison to only look at self_ly() instead of full_ly() in lilypond-book for some good reason... but that has the unintended effect of sometimes not rebuilding a failed @lilypond. I don't see it being worth playing games with this, though. We shouldn't be changing [options] very often anyway -- I mean, 90% should be [quote,verbatim,relative=2], and 9% should be [quote,verbatim]. Unfortunately there's a bunch of old cruft that _doesn't_ follow those, so we have some short-term danger. People testing doc patches which change [options] before pushing them to master should probably do a build from scratch just to be safe. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
