On Mon, 2022-10-17 at 20:11 +0100, Alex Harker wrote: > Thanks for clarifying what would be helpful. I’m currently trying to > get lilypond building locally with these scripts, although I’ve not > managed to fully complete that process yet. > > The dependencies were pretty much fine, but I had a 404 with zlib > whilst downloading the source and had to move to the next version to > get rid of that.
Sigh, the old zlib-1.2.12.tar.xz got moved away due to the fixed CVE. I guess we'll need to update to 1.2.12 before the weekend then... > I also managed to build the dependencies with a lower Mac OS > requirement than the machine I was building on with very little in > the way of added python code. As I said, I still don't think this is the right way to go. The minimum version is chosen for an objective reason (everything older is EOL by Apple). > When building lilypond I hit an issue with some old/partial version > of harfbuzz in usr/local/ which I removed. > Then I hit an error compiling the lexer, which as of yet I’ve not > been able to trace. > > I realise that the first priority is probably testing, but I’d like > to be able to build as I feel I might be able to be more useful in > that case. I also understand the fear about things breaking out of > the blue, but for MacOS dev my experience is that if support for old > Ones became an issue that’s more likely to be a compile-time, rather > than a runtime issue. > > In terms of testing - are there tests that would be good to run, or > is the required testing more general (e.g. - it runs on an arbitrary > lilypond score file). > > In terms of Lilypond.app - I suspect this would be useful to maintain > - it’s how I was using it until my latest system (at which point I > moved to Frescobaldi to have a GUI - that’s a much nicer > environment). I think the majority of Mac users wouldn’t be > comfortable with a command-line interface, or having to deal with a > separate GUI/environment to be installed onto. Thus, from my view > this is about new adopters - getting people to try Lilypond in the > first place. > > I saw a branch that looked like it might be the old Mac app - I’d be > happy to take a look once I can get lilypond building. Can someone > confirm where this is? I presume the first goal would simply be to > resurrect it as is? The packaging part is trivial - it’s the app > itself will require more of look, but there are also tighter > requirements in terms of code signing etc. these days in terms of > getting around Apple’s gatekeeper and that would be something to > think about later down the line, but only once the app was back up an > running locally. This was discussed before, and we *wanted* to get rid of LilyPad. Please see Jean's answer for more details. > Let me know also if I should continue any more technical questions > here, or on another list. Yes, let's stop hijacking this thread, the discussed topic has nothing to do anymore with the original subject. Discussions like this should happen in separate threads on lilypond-devel, not the -user list. Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part