Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno mer 25 ott 2017 alle 16:14, Federico Bruni 
 ha scritto:



I was hoping that installing this new urw package would have saved me 
from using this script.
So my implicit question was: why OpenType font files are not packaged 
in fedora urw-core35-fonts package?


I've just checked and debian (testing) package seems to contain also 
the .otf files:

https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-fonts/fonts-urw-base35.git/tree/fonts

So I guess I should ask the Fedora packagers.

Wait, I found the answer here:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/urw-base35-fonts/blob/master/f/urw-base35-fonts.spec#_88




and a detailed discussion is here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[James Lowe]

Federico,

On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 13:16:48 +0200, Federico Bruni  wrote:

> 
> 
> Il giorno gio 5 ott 2017 alle 14:01, Federico Bruni 
>  ha scritto:
> > 
> > 
> > Il giorno gio 5 ott 2017 alle 3:10, Karlin High 
> >  ha scritto:
> >> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Carl Sorensen  
> >> wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >> 
> >>>  somehow this patch needs to be coordinated with Federico,
> >>>  rather than using the standard LilyPond patch sequence.
> >> 
> >> That's what I gathered, too. I assumed Federico follows this list. 
> >> The
> >> discussion had
> >> stopped with the question of how to instruct new developers to get 
> >> the fonts,
> >> and I debated whether to continue it here,
> >> or on the Sourceforge or Rietveld issues.
> >> 
> > 
> > Hi Karlin
> > 
> > In my opinion these fonts should be provided by linux distros.
> > I've just read that a new package urw-base35-fonts will replace the 
> > obsolete urw-fonts in Fedora 27 (which should be released in 
> > November):
> > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/urw-base35-fonts-20170801-1.fc27
> > 
> > Upstream repository is:
> > https://github.com/ArtifexSoftware/urw-base35-fonts
> > 
> 
> I'm testing a new container based on Fedora 27, where urw-base35-fonts 
> is installed.
> However, I'm still getting the configure error because it seems that 
> lilypond need the .otf files and this package contains only *.t1 and 
> *.afm files:
> 
> # ls /usr/share/fonts/urw-base35
> C059-BdIta.afm   NimbusRoman-Regular.afm 
> P052-Roman.afm
> C059-BdIta.t1NimbusRoman-Regular.t1  
> P052-Roman.t1
> C059-Bold.afmNimbusSans-Bold.afm 
> StandardSymbolsPS.afm
> C059-Bold.t1 NimbusSans-Bold.t1  
> StandardSymbolsPS.t1
> C059-Italic.afm  NimbusSans-BoldItalic.afm   
> URWBookman-Demi.afm
> C059-Italic.t1   NimbusSans-BoldItalic.t1
> URWBookman-Demi.t1
> C059-Roman.afm   NimbusSans-Italic.afm   
> URWBookman-DemiItalic.afm
> C059-Roman.t1NimbusSans-Italic.t1
> URWBookman-DemiItalic.t1
> D05L.afm NimbusSans-Regular.afm  
> URWBookman-Light.afm
> D05L.t1  NimbusSans-Regular.t1   
> URWBookman-Light.t1
> NimbusMonoPS-Bold.afmNimbusSansNarrow-BdOblique.afm  
> URWBookman-LightItalic.afm
> NimbusMonoPS-Bold.t1 NimbusSansNarrow-BdOblique.t1   
> URWBookman-LightItalic.t1
> NimbusMonoPS-BoldItalic.afm  NimbusSansNarrow-Bold.afm   
> URWGothic-Book.afm
> NimbusMonoPS-BoldItalic.t1   NimbusSansNarrow-Bold.t1
> URWGothic-Book.t1
> NimbusMonoPS-Italic.afm  NimbusSansNarrow-Oblique.afm
> URWGothic-BookOblique.afm
> NimbusMonoPS-Italic.t1   NimbusSansNarrow-Oblique.t1 
> URWGothic-BookOblique.t1
> NimbusMonoPS-Regular.afm NimbusSansNarrow-Regular.afm
> URWGothic-Demi.afm
> NimbusMonoPS-Regular.t1  NimbusSansNarrow-Regular.t1 
> URWGothic-Demi.t1
> NimbusRoman-Bold.afm P052-Bold.afm   
> URWGothic-DemiOblique.afm
> NimbusRoman-Bold.t1  P052-Bold.t1
> URWGothic-DemiOblique.t1
> NimbusRoman-BoldItalic.afm   P052-BoldItalic.afm 
> Z003-MediumItalic.afm
> NimbusRoman-BoldItalic.t1P052-BoldItalic.t1  
> Z003-MediumItalic.t1
> NimbusRoman-Italic.afm   P052-Italic.afm fonts.dir
> NimbusRoman-Italic.t1P052-Italic.t1
> 
> What would you recommend to do? (question open to all the fonts guru in 
> this list...)
> 
> There's an open issue to document this in the CG:
> https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4998/
> 

I have not been able to find anyway other than manually copying the OTF files 
from their git repo.

There was a discussion started here

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2017-10/msg00019.html

Oh but I see you already replied to this in

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2017-10/msg00022.html

So if this is just for LilyDev then I'd just install them manually like you 
would for other dependencies by copying the files manually.

James
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno gio 5 ott 2017 alle 14:01, Federico Bruni 
 ha scritto:



Il giorno gio 5 ott 2017 alle 3:10, Karlin High 
 ha scritto:
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Carl Sorensen  
wrote:

[...]



 somehow this patch needs to be coordinated with Federico,
 rather than using the standard LilyPond patch sequence.


That's what I gathered, too. I assumed Federico follows this list. 
The

discussion had
stopped with the question of how to instruct new developers to get 
the fonts,

and I debated whether to continue it here,
or on the Sourceforge or Rietveld issues.



Hi Karlin

In my opinion these fonts should be provided by linux distros.
I've just read that a new package urw-base35-fonts will replace the 
obsolete urw-fonts in Fedora 27 (which should be released in 
November):

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/urw-base35-fonts-20170801-1.fc27

Upstream repository is:
https://github.com/ArtifexSoftware/urw-base35-fonts



I'm testing a new container based on Fedora 27, where urw-base35-fonts 
is installed.
However, I'm still getting the configure error because it seems that 
lilypond need the .otf files and this package contains only *.t1 and 
*.afm files:


# ls /usr/share/fonts/urw-base35
C059-BdIta.afm   NimbusRoman-Regular.afm 
P052-Roman.afm
C059-BdIta.t1NimbusRoman-Regular.t1  
P052-Roman.t1
C059-Bold.afmNimbusSans-Bold.afm 
StandardSymbolsPS.afm
C059-Bold.t1 NimbusSans-Bold.t1  
StandardSymbolsPS.t1
C059-Italic.afm  NimbusSans-BoldItalic.afm   
URWBookman-Demi.afm
C059-Italic.t1   NimbusSans-BoldItalic.t1
URWBookman-Demi.t1
C059-Roman.afm   NimbusSans-Italic.afm   
URWBookman-DemiItalic.afm
C059-Roman.t1NimbusSans-Italic.t1
URWBookman-DemiItalic.t1
D05L.afm NimbusSans-Regular.afm  
URWBookman-Light.afm
D05L.t1  NimbusSans-Regular.t1   
URWBookman-Light.t1
NimbusMonoPS-Bold.afmNimbusSansNarrow-BdOblique.afm  
URWBookman-LightItalic.afm
NimbusMonoPS-Bold.t1 NimbusSansNarrow-BdOblique.t1   
URWBookman-LightItalic.t1
NimbusMonoPS-BoldItalic.afm  NimbusSansNarrow-Bold.afm   
URWGothic-Book.afm
NimbusMonoPS-BoldItalic.t1   NimbusSansNarrow-Bold.t1
URWGothic-Book.t1
NimbusMonoPS-Italic.afm  NimbusSansNarrow-Oblique.afm
URWGothic-BookOblique.afm
NimbusMonoPS-Italic.t1   NimbusSansNarrow-Oblique.t1 
URWGothic-BookOblique.t1
NimbusMonoPS-Regular.afm NimbusSansNarrow-Regular.afm
URWGothic-Demi.afm
NimbusMonoPS-Regular.t1  NimbusSansNarrow-Regular.t1 
URWGothic-Demi.t1
NimbusRoman-Bold.afm P052-Bold.afm   
URWGothic-DemiOblique.afm
NimbusRoman-Bold.t1  P052-Bold.t1
URWGothic-DemiOblique.t1
NimbusRoman-BoldItalic.afm   P052-BoldItalic.afm 
Z003-MediumItalic.afm
NimbusRoman-BoldItalic.t1P052-BoldItalic.t1  
Z003-MediumItalic.t1

NimbusRoman-Italic.afm   P052-Italic.afm fonts.dir
NimbusRoman-Italic.t1P052-Italic.t1

What would you recommend to do? (question open to all the fonts guru in 
this list...)


There's an open issue to document this in the CG:
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4998/

Thanks
Federico




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Thomas Morley]

2017-10-10 22:53 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup :
> Knut Petersen  writes:
>
>> Am 10.10.2017 um 20:56 schrieb Thomas Morley:
>>> Also, it's the question which guile-version we should aim at.
>>> Antonio's patches are made for guile-2.0, but guile-2.2 is far more
>>> promising, imho.
>>
>> About a year ago guile 2.0 was terribly slow. Is there any progress?
>
> Respective to 2.0, yes.  But it's still decidedly awful compared to 1.8
> as used in LilyPond.
>
> --
> David Kastrup

2.2 is faster than 2.0 but still much slower than 1.8.
This may improve, if we manage to get reasonable use of .go-files.

In my experience 2.2 eats far less memory even compared to 1.8.

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[David Kastrup]

Knut Petersen  writes:

> Am 10.10.2017 um 20:56 schrieb Thomas Morley:
>> Also, it's the question which guile-version we should aim at.
>> Antonio's patches are made for guile-2.0, but guile-2.2 is far more
>> promising, imho.
>
> About a year ago guile 2.0 was terribly slow. Is there any progress?

Respective to 2.0, yes.  But it's still decidedly awful compared to 1.8
as used in LilyPond.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Knut Petersen]

Am 10.10.2017 um 20:56 schrieb Thomas Morley:

Also, it's the question which guile-version we should aim at.
Antonio's patches are made for guile-2.0, but guile-2.2 is far more
promising, imho.


About a year ago guile 2.0 was terribly slow. Is there any progress?

Knut

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Thomas Morley]

2017-10-10 15:25 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup :
> Karlin High  writes:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Federico Bruni  wrote:
>>> Thank you Karlin, I've started having a look at it, but I don't have
>>> much spare time these days...  The main problem with LilyDev master
>>> (version 5) is that it's meant for guile-2 migration (which seems
>>> stopped), but I guess that most of contributors are not interested in
>>> this and want to be able to build lilypond on master branch. So this
>>> is the main issue to fix in LilyDev.
>>
>> How deep of an understanding of guile and LilyPond internals does
>> someone need to work on guile-2 migration? I am under the impression
>> that with anything much below David Kastrup's, it is largely out of
>> the question.
>
> Not all that much until you hit a roadblock.  Then you yell.  The
> current roadblocks tend to be of the kind that is little related to
> LilyPond internals and a lot related to Guile and C and C++.
>
> --
> David Kastrup

Some time ago Antonio worked on it, see
https://ao2.it/tmp/lilypond-guile2/
https://ao2.it/tmp/lilypond-guile2/TODO

Some patches (but slightly different) are now in master, all in
dev/guile-v2-work (you'd need to rebase dev/guile-v2-work and solve
some merge-conflicts, if you'd try to build from this branch)
My plan was to put all of his patches into master with if-guilev2-conditions.
Though, it was the agreement not to go for guile2 for lilypond-2.20.0,
so I didn't continue, because I didn't want to disturb the
2.20.-release or distracting from it.

Also, it's the question which guile-version we should aim at.
Antonio's patches are made for guile-2.0, but guile-2.2 is far more
promising, imho.

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno mar 10 ott 2017 alle 13:52, Karlin High 
 ha scritto:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Federico Bruni  
wrote:
 Thank you Karlin, I've started having a look at it, but I don't 
have much

 spare time these days...
 The main problem with LilyDev master (version 5) is that it's meant 
for

 guile-2 migration (which seems stopped), but I guess that most of
 contributors are not interested in this and want to be able to build
 lilypond on master branch. So this is the main issue to fix in 
LilyDev.



For LilyDev, there are also other complaints from the configure
script. I saw something from libpango, GhostScript, extractpdfmark,
and possibly more. Reporting the details of these is on my LilyPond
to-do list. I was able to resolve the GhostScript issue by cloning the
git repository, doing a checkout on the tag for version 9.20, and
compiling from source. The other packages have further dependencies,
and I didn't follow the rabbit holes to their ends.



extractpdfmark is available on debian stretch, see:
https://packages.debian.org/stretch/extractpdfmark
https://github.com/trueroad/extractpdfmark

It's not available in Fedora, unfortunately.
tlmgr is not available in Fedora either. So I compiled extractpdf from 
source.


 Or maybe I should just move to LilyDevOS and forget LilyDev. It 
would be

 much easier for me.


And I can mostly make LilyDevOS work for me. But I'm a Debian native,
and the Fedora environment stumbles me sometimes.


I was already thinking about adding a Debian container. It will be 
pretty quick.

The only problem is guile-1.8: I guess I'll have to pin it from sid.

So it would be: a fedora container, a debian container and a full 
virtual machine running Fedora with LXQT desktop.


And THEN there's

going to be issues with the lily-git.tcl script; for the life of me I
couldn't get it connected from the terminal window to my X display,
even after further research on the instructions for it. The setup I
had involved XRDP for remote access, so I am blaming that.



I never used lily-git.tcl so I totally forgot about it.
In the container try updating your .bashrc this way (I've added 
auxiliar to the path and an alias for lily-git):


$ tail ~/.bashrc
# Add other directories to the PATH
export PATH=$HOME/git-cl:$LILYPOND_GIT/scripts/auxiliar:$PATH

# Let some GUI programs work on host display
alias gitk="DISPLAY=:0 gitk"
alias lily-git.tcl="DISPLAY=:0 lily-git.tcl"

I will add these changes in next release.




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[David Kastrup]

Karlin High  writes:

> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Federico Bruni  wrote:
>> Thank you Karlin, I've started having a look at it, but I don't have
>> much spare time these days...  The main problem with LilyDev master
>> (version 5) is that it's meant for guile-2 migration (which seems
>> stopped), but I guess that most of contributors are not interested in
>> this and want to be able to build lilypond on master branch. So this
>> is the main issue to fix in LilyDev.
>
> How deep of an understanding of guile and LilyPond internals does
> someone need to work on guile-2 migration? I am under the impression
> that with anything much below David Kastrup's, it is largely out of
> the question.

Not all that much until you hit a roadblock.  Then you yell.  The
current roadblocks tend to be of the kind that is little related to
LilyPond internals and a lot related to Guile and C and C++.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Karlin High]

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Federico Bruni  wrote:
> Thank you Karlin, I've started having a look at it, but I don't have much
> spare time these days...
> The main problem with LilyDev master (version 5) is that it's meant for
> guile-2 migration (which seems stopped), but I guess that most of
> contributors are not interested in this and want to be able to build
> lilypond on master branch. So this is the main issue to fix in LilyDev.

How deep of an understanding of guile and LilyPond internals does
someone need to work on guile-2 migration? I am under the impression
that with anything much below David Kastrup's, it is largely out of
the question.

For LilyDev, there are also other complaints from the configure
script. I saw something from libpango, GhostScript, extractpdfmark,
and possibly more. Reporting the details of these is on my LilyPond
to-do list. I was able to resolve the GhostScript issue by cloning the
git repository, doing a checkout on the tag for version 9.20, and
compiling from source. The other packages have further dependencies,
and I didn't follow the rabbit holes to their ends.

> Or maybe I should just move to LilyDevOS and forget LilyDev. It would be
> much easier for me.

And I can mostly make LilyDevOS work for me. But I'm a Debian native,
and the Fedora environment stumbles me sometimes. And THEN there's
going to be issues with the lily-git.tcl script; for the life of me I
couldn't get it connected from the terminal window to my X display,
even after further research on the instructions for it. The setup I
had involved XRDP for remote access, so I am blaming that.

I once saw a list discussion somewhere about replacing this TCL
script, as it was the only thing in the entire project using the
language. And then I saw a - perhaps a GitHub project? - for a
dialog.sh script that aimed to have functionality like ncurses for
having a user interface right in a command-line terminal.
-- 
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno ven 6 ott 2017 alle 21:25, Karlin High  
ha scritto:
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Federico Bruni  
wrote:
 Anyway, if we decide that the setup script in LilyDev should 
include your

 proposal, I'll be happy to see a pull request


https://github.com/fedelibre/LilyDev/pull/8

If you decide against including this, I will be OK with that. Perhaps
5 or so :) new contributors might benefit before the fonts get
included in the LilyDev base distro and this issue self-resolves.
--



Thank you Karlin, I've started having a look at it, but I don't have 
much spare time these days...
The main problem with LilyDev master (version 5) is that it's meant for 
guile-2 migration (which seems stopped), but I guess that most of 
contributors are not interested in this and want to be able to build 
lilypond on master branch. So this is the main issue to fix in LilyDev.


Or maybe I should just move to LilyDevOS and forget LilyDev. It would 
be much easier for me.






___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Karlin High]

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Federico Bruni  wrote:
> Anyway, if we decide that the setup script in LilyDev should include your
> proposal, I'll be happy to see a pull request

https://github.com/fedelibre/LilyDev/pull/8

If you decide against including this, I will be OK with that. Perhaps
5 or so :) new contributors might benefit before the fonts get
included in the LilyDev base distro and this issue self-resolves.
-- 
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno gio 5 ott 2017 alle 3:10, Karlin High  
ha scritto:
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Carl Sorensen  
wrote:

[...]



 somehow this patch needs to be coordinated with Federico,
 rather than using the standard LilyPond patch sequence.


That's what I gathered, too. I assumed Federico follows this list. The
discussion had
stopped with the question of how to instruct new developers to get 
the fonts,

and I debated whether to continue it here,
or on the Sourceforge or Rietveld issues.



Hi Karlin

In my opinion these fonts should be provided by linux distros.
I've just read that a new package urw-base35-fonts will replace the 
obsolete urw-fonts in Fedora 27 (which should be released in November):

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/urw-base35-fonts-20170801-1.fc27

Upstream repository is:
https://github.com/ArtifexSoftware/urw-base35-fonts

I hope that Debian will do the same. I guess this is the package (at 
the moment only in experimental):

https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=fonts-urw-base35




### about LilyDev ###

I've recently created a new LilyDev project, which I called LilyDevOS 
(based on latest stable Fedora):

https://github.com/fedelibre/LilyDevOS

This means that in a couple of months LilyDevOS may have this problem 
fixed.


It's not mentioned in LilyPond doc, as I thought I should wait for 
feedback from all LilyDev users.
It has a number of advantages over LilyDev and for me it's much easier 
to use, for a number of reasons which I've listed here:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2017-07/msg00014.html

Anyway, if we decide that the setup script in LilyDev should include 
your proposal, I'll be happy to see a pull request (if you have a 
github account) or I'll do the change for you. The problem in LilyDev 
is how to handle the guile1.8 problem: version 5 (master) is based on 
stretch and does not support guile1.8; version 4 is based on jessie and 
has guile1.8.





___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Karlin High]

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Carl Sorensen  wrote:
> I haven't pulled out all the fonts yet to see how big they are, but I'm
> uncomfortable with referencing a blob in a given commit on the repo.

I think the largest one was about 101KB. So perhaps 1.5MB for all 12 of them.

> I'd be happier if it were referencing a blob in master.
> If it's not too big, I'd be even happier if we could just do a shallow
> clone of the git repo, so the command would never need to change.

Agreed. But I know too little about this issue to help with that.
Is it these EXACT files that are needed? Do newer versions cause problems?

> And we would used git to manage the download, which is what we were
> using previously.

Until the files are part of the repositories already being cloned,
they have to come from somewhere else, I expect.
If there's a git command to download
"just these 12 files, not the whole font repository"
then that could be the way to go. But wget is pretty standard on Linux, right?

> somehow this patch needs to be coordinated with Federico,
> rather than using the standard LilyPond patch sequence.

That's what I gathered, too. I assumed Federico follows this list. The
discussion had
stopped with the question of how to instruct new developers to get the fonts,
and I debated whether to continue it here,
or on the Sourceforge or Rietveld issues.

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Installing URW++ fonts, issue 4998: why not add wget lines to lilydev-setup.sh?

[Carl Sorensen]

On 10/4/17 4:06 PM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of Karlin High"
 wrote:

>https://codereview.appspot.com/315850043/
>https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4998/
>
>I found this issue with the fonts while reading the LilyDev
>instructions on GitHub. To me, it looks like the easiest way to
>resolve it would be adding some WGET commands to the
>~/.lilydev-setup.sh script, right after the git clone operations that
>are already assuming an Internet connection. Then the fonts would be
>available from the beginning, and perhaps no special documentation
>would be needed. I'm attaching a proposed script for this idea. (No
>master of BASH here; could be doing it wrong.)

I haven't pulled out all the fonts yet to see how big they are, but I'm
uncomfortable with referencing a blob in a given commit on the repo.

I'd be happier if it were referencing a blob in master.

If it's not too big, I'd be even happier if we could just do a shallow
clone of the git repo, so the command would never need to change. And we
would used git to manage the download, which is what we were using
previously.

Having said all that, I'm fine with what you propose, if none of my other
ideas are workable.

Oh, and by the way, I'm not sure how to handle this, since strictly
speaking LilyDev is a separate product from LilyPond, and we don't host
LilyDev as part of the LilyPond repository.  So somehow this patch needs
to be coordinated with Federico, rather than using the standard LilyPond
patch sequence.

Thanks,

Carl


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel