Thank you David. I tried a 32-bit version but the installation fails, so that confirms that I am pulling the correct version. I also tried unpacking the archive for the current release, but the executables fail as follows:
the lilypond command returns: /bin/sh: lilypond: not found even though the directory in in my PATH and the lilypond-book command returns: /usr/bin/lilypond-2.24.1/bin/lilypond-book: exec: line 10: /usr/bin/lilypond-2.24.1/bin/../libexec/python3.10: not found Any thoughts? On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 6:57 PM David Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue 11 Apr 2023 at 17:04:07 (-0700), JD Margulici wrote: > > Hello, I am running the following commands to install Lilypond on Alpine > > Linux: > > > > wget https://lilypond.org/download/binaries/linux-64/$LILYPOND_INSTALLER > > sh $LILYPOND_INSTALLER > > > > with LILYPOND_INSTALLER set to lilypond-2.23.6-1.linux-64.sh > > … (a 64-bit version). > > > The installation proceeds without glitches. However when I try to run > > Lilypond I get the following error message, which in spite of its > apparent > > simplicity is rather cryptic since the file that is not found actually > > exists: > > > > /usr/local/bin/lilypond: exec: line 4: > > /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/lilypond: not found > > > > Similar error with lilypond-book: > > > > /usr/local/bin/lilypond-book: exec: line 6: > > /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/python3: not found > > > > I found a 15-year old post that reports the same error, but the > > resolution was not clear: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2009-01/msg00725.html > > Reading that post and its OP, it looks as if they installed a 32-bit > version on a 64-bit OS. Can you check that you're not doing the opposite? > > My machine: > > $ uname -a > Linux axis 5.10.0-21-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 5.10.162-1 (2023-01-21) x86_64 > GNU/Linux > $ > ↑↑↑↑↑ ↑↑↑↑↑↑ > > Apropos the version that you're installing, 2.23.6. That's the last > version of LP that comes as an insaller. More recent versions come > as an archive which you just unpack somewhere. Does this change > have anything to do with why you're running this old and otherwise > unnotable version? > > Cheers, > David. >
