Hi; Update:
I'm using Emacs built for MacOS now, temporarily, over the emacs coming from homebrew. I have emacs running full screen. I have split the screen into two windows. The upper one now has my origin pdf (DocVew!) and my bottom window is the Lilypond source file. When I need to view two different portions of the Lilypond source simultaneously, I split that window into two windows (either vertically or horizontally). I have yet to figure out how to dynamically fill another window with the Lilypond pdf output, but I think I have a workflow solution all inside emacs now. Thanks, Ken PS: Probably should end this thread now as it is really not Lilypond-specific. I really appreciate all the responses. On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 4:09 PM Kenneth Wolcott <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you all for your responses. > > I'm not at all offended by the XY type of response. > > I'll try to elaborate without TMI... > > I use Preview with maximum width for my external monitor and minimum > height, to display what I am engraving from, and then scroll it down > line by line. > > I then have a terminal window (multi-tabbed) immediately beneath it > to the right, all the way to the bottom. > > I use command line emacs (not GUI or Windows style) in the terminal > window to edit Lilypond source. > > I then use control-Z to suspend the emacs session, and run my script > (written in Perl) which calls Lilypond and then displays the resultant > pdf using Reader (another pdf app distinct from Preview). > > I specify Reader to display the pdf because if I don't the pdf will > be displayed by Preview in a tab which is totally useless to view an > entire page of output when it is in the same size as my origin pdf. > > I have not seen an effective way to prevent the tabbed Preview. It > looks like some developer decided that multiple files must be > displayed as a tab for efficiency rather than having two instances of > the app. Breaks my desired workflow :-( > > Now, I want to make changes (or add new content)...the existing > Reader app instance will not update automatically and will not update > manually; I have to exit it and re-execute (my script will execute it, > but is unable to exit it, so I have to exit manually). > > If my script could kill the existing Reader app instance and start > another one, that would be great, but pstree/pkill (Apple built-in > process view and kill commands) apparently have no effect on either > Preview or Reader (or any app for that matter). > > So there's lots of keystrokes (or mouse clicks) that interfere with > the visual process and the hand-and-eye coordination is disrupted. > This is extremely annoying. > > It would be nice if I could do almost everything inside emacs. Even > if that's not possible, removing some of these extra moving parts > might help with the workflow. I'd like to have the script have more > control over the environment. My script is a very simple wrapper > around Lilypond, not near as powerful or sophisticated as a makefile, > but similar. > > I use git (no branching) to back up my work and an external hard drive. > > I was hoping to use postscript instead of pdf during the development > process as I might have more control over the app and therefore the > workflow and therefore be more productive and less frustrated. > > This process was so much easier when using Solaris on a Sun pizza > box (30+ years ago). It worked great on Linux (less than 30 years > ago). Perhaps the Mac is just too much "locked hood" (can't fiddle > with the engine) and that frustrates this old retired geezer. I hated > Windows for this same reason; no user control over my environment. I > guess that's way I like emacs, Perl, Linux, UNIX... > > Anyway...I was trying to simplify my workflow... > > Thanks, > Ken Wolcott > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 7:22 AM David Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed 03 Aug 2022 at 09:22:53 (+0200), Jean Abou Samra wrote: > > > > Le 3 août 2022 à 01:24, Kenneth Wolcott <[email protected]> a > > > > écrit : > > > > I'm trying to simplify my workflow. I think I want to generate > > > > postscript files instead of pdf files when using Lilypond. I already > > > > know how to do that. But what I need to know is, on a Mac, how to > > > > display the postscript file from the command line. I used to do this > > > > all the time a long time ago when I used UNIX and Linux, but homebrew > > > > gs doesn't display the postscript. I do not want to use preview. > > > > > > > > This used to be a TRIVIAL thing to do when I was younger, but now I > > > > am old and my brain just isn't what it used to be. > > > > > > > > I've looked at several man pages and/or info and/or help (lastly > > > > /opt/homebrew/Cellar/ghostscript/9.56.1_1/share/doc/ghostscript/9.56.1/Use.htm) > > > > > > > > Current attempt: > > > > > > > > /opt/homebrew/Cellar/ghostscript/9.56.1_1/bin/gs -sDEVICE=display > > > > ../target/The_Swan.ps > > > > GPL Ghostscript 9.56.1 (2022-04-04) > > > > Copyright (C) 2022 Artifex Software, Inc. All rights reserved. > > > > This software is supplied under the GNU AGPLv3 and comes with NO > > > > WARRANTY: > > > > see the file COPYING for details. > > > > zsh: segmentation fault > > > > /opt/homebrew/Cellar/ghostscript/9.56.1_1/bin/gs -sDEVICE=display > > > > > > > > So, what flags should I be using just to display the postscript? > > > > > > Personally, I’d just have done > > > > > > ps2pdf file.ps > > > open file.pdf > > > > I'd be tempted to do the same. Having put up with gv's interface for > > years, it was a relief when a pdflatex workflow supplanted dvips's. > > > > But another suggestion would be to run LP with > > -ddelete-intermediate-files='#f' > > in which case you get both a PS and PDF. View one, and rename and > > process the other. The wrinkle is, of course, that Usage states: > > > > delete-intermediate-files bool > > If bool is #t, delete the unusable, intermediate .ps files > > created during compilation > > Default: #t. > > > > However, I can't see any visual difference between LP's PDF and the > > PDF converted by ps2pdf from the intermediate file. Should I? > > What is meant to make the PS unusable? > > > > > I believe this is actually what some of the modern document viewers do if > > > you ask them to open a PS file. > > > > > > Bottom line: this may be an XY question. Why do you want to generate > > > PostScript in the first place? > > > > My first thought, too, especially as the OP writes "I /think/ I want > > to generate postscript files …". But I hope my suggestions above are > > suitably actionable, though not in the sense that word is usually used > > over here. :) > > > > Cheers, > > David.
