Re: Ubuntu 12.04 as a LilyDev
Hello 2012/3/6 Francisco Vila : > 2012/3/6 Janek Warchoł : >> The only thing that concerns me is xterm. Do i understand correctly >> that it's the only available terminal? The default one in current >> LilyDev is much better, has tabs and all eye-candy a terminal can >> have. > > What does Ctrl+Alt+T do? ;) Bingo! James -- -- James ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ubuntu 12.04 as a LilyDev
2012/3/6 Janek Warchoł : > The only thing that concerns me is xterm. Do i understand correctly > that it's the only available terminal? The default one in current > LilyDev is much better, has tabs and all eye-candy a terminal can > have. What does Ctrl+Alt+T do? -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ubuntu 12.04 as a LilyDev
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:22 PM, James wrote: > Hello, > > 2012/3/6 Janek Warchoł : >> Maybe LilyDev 2.0 should be Ubuntu 12.04. > > No we have to think about GUB and the fact that 12.04 is still in > beta. I think as has been suggested by Graham that we'll do another > round on 10.04 with LilyDev 2.5 and then once 12.04 has bedded in a > bit then move. I need also to make sure that remastersys (which is > what we use to build the ISO) works on 12.04 - I haven't tried that > yet. > >> The only thing that concerns me is xterm. Do i understand correctly >> that it's the only available terminal? > > No, you understand that that was the only thing I could think to type > for a terminal at that moment :) ok. thanks, Janek ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ubuntu 12.04 as a LilyDev
Hello, 2012/3/6 Janek Warchoł : > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 8:25 PM, James wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I've just been seeing if Ubuntu 12.04 is going to cause any >> significant problems for the next major LilyDev upgrade. >> [...] >> make and make doc work fine (well make doc completes with no errors I >> haven't actually looked through all the PDFs but the LM looked fine on >> a quick skim). >> >> I'm not going to comment on the Unity interface as I know that is a >> sore topic for some users, but apart from figuring out how to get an >> xterm (alt-f2 then type xterm!) it was pretty pain free. It's >> certainly a smoother experience than 10.04 (if one cares about that >> subtlety) even in a VM. >> >> Compilation times are no quicker/slower it seems, although I haven't >> 'watched' a make doc for a few months now (I just kick off the command >> and go and have a life, it's all done when I get back) so I thought it >> had 'hung' as I am conditioned with my few years of making doc of a >> constant stream 'matrix like' of screenout put. But this stuttered and >> stopped so much I really thought something was wrong, Then I >> realised... >> >> Well 'squashed' Mr Phil! :) >> >> Anyway, hope this was useful or interesting at the very least. > > It was! Maybe LilyDev 2.0 should be Ubuntu 12.04. No we have to think about GUB and the fact that 12.04 is still in beta. I think as has been suggested by Graham that we'll do another round on 10.04 with LilyDev 2.5 and then once 12.04 has bedded in a bit then move. I need also to make sure that remastersys (which is what we use to build the ISO) works on 12.04 - I haven't tried that yet. > The only thing that concerns me is xterm. Do i understand correctly > that it's the only available terminal? No, you understand that that was the only thing I could think to type for a terminal at that moment :) > The default one in current > LilyDev is much better, has tabs and all eye-candy a terminal can > have. Quite. James -- -- James ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ubuntu 12.04 as a LilyDev
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 8:25 PM, James wrote: > Hello, > > I've just been seeing if Ubuntu 12.04 is going to cause any > significant problems for the next major LilyDev upgrade. > [...] > make and make doc work fine (well make doc completes with no errors I > haven't actually looked through all the PDFs but the LM looked fine on > a quick skim). > > I'm not going to comment on the Unity interface as I know that is a > sore topic for some users, but apart from figuring out how to get an > xterm (alt-f2 then type xterm!) it was pretty pain free. It's > certainly a smoother experience than 10.04 (if one cares about that > subtlety) even in a VM. > > Compilation times are no quicker/slower it seems, although I haven't > 'watched' a make doc for a few months now (I just kick off the command > and go and have a life, it's all done when I get back) so I thought it > had 'hung' as I am conditioned with my few years of making doc of a > constant stream 'matrix like' of screenout put. But this stuttered and > stopped so much I really thought something was wrong, Then I > realised... > > Well 'squashed' Mr Phil! :) > > Anyway, hope this was useful or interesting at the very least. It was! Maybe LilyDev 2.0 should be Ubuntu 12.04. The only thing that concerns me is xterm. Do i understand correctly that it's the only available terminal? The default one in current LilyDev is much better, has tabs and all eye-candy a terminal can have. thanks, Janek ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ubuntu 12.04 as a LilyDev
James writes: > Hello, > > I've just been seeing if Ubuntu 12.04 is going to cause any > significant problems for the next major LilyDev upgrade. > checking gcc version... 4.6.3 Wow. It was released on March 1 or so IIRC. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Ubuntu 12.04 as a LilyDev
Hello,
I've just been seeing if Ubuntu 12.04 is going to cause any
significant problems for the next major LilyDev upgrade.
I had no problems at all.
12.04 is still in beta
1.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PrecisePangolin/TechnicalOverview/Beta1#Download_the_Beta_1
This was the image I used
http://ubuntu.virginmedia.com/releases//precise/ubuntu-12.04-beta1-desktop-i386.iso
2. Then after installing as a VM downloaded a further 170mb of Ubuntu
'software updates'
3. Reboot (as prompted) and then following the CG here:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/requirements-for-compiling-lilypond
sudo apt-get build-dep lilypond
That's about 298mb of more downloads.
4. Extra software that I needed to download
i. dblatex (required for make doc)
ii. autoconf (required for well ./autogen.sh)
iii. git (and gitk if you so wish)
5. Download lilygit-tcl and run it then fill in your name and email
and 'get source'. Wait until that all downloads.
6. when I run ../configure I get:
--snip--
checking build system type... i686-pc-linux-gnu
checking host system type... i686-pc-linux-gnu
checking Package... LILYPOND
checking builddir... /home/james/lilypond-git/build
checking for stepmake... ../stepmake (${datarootdir}/stepmake not found)
checking for gmake... no
checking for make... make
checking for find... find
checking for tar... tar
checking for bash... /bin/bash
checking for python... python
checking python version... 2.7.2
checking for python... /usr/bin/python
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables...
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed
checking whether compiler understands -pipe... yes
checking for IEEE-conformance compiler flags... none
checking for fc-list... fc-list
checking New Century Schoolbook PFB files...
/usr/share/fonts/type1/gsfonts/c059016l.pfb
/usr/share/fonts/type1/gsfonts/c059036l.pfb
/usr/share/fonts/type1/gsfonts/c059033l.pfb
/usr/share/fonts/type1/gsfonts/c059013l.pfb
checking for python... /usr/bin/python
checking /usr/bin/python version... 2.7.2
checking for /usr/bin/python... /usr/bin/python
checking for g++... g++
checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... yes
checking whether g++ accepts -g... yes
checking how to run the C++ preprocessor... g++ -E
checking for grep that handles long lines and -e... /bin/grep
checking for egrep... /bin/grep -E
checking gcc version... 4.6.3
checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... (cached) yes
checking whether g++ accepts -g... (cached) yes
checking g++ version... 4.6.3
checking options for known g++ tail call bug... -fno-optimize-sibling-calls
checking whether explicit instantiation is needed... no
checking for stl.data () method... yes
checking for ar... ar
checking for ranlib... ranlib
checking for dlopen in -ldl... yes
checking for dlopen... yes
checking for bison... bison -y
checking for bison... bison
checking bison version... 2.5
checking for flex... flex
checking for ANSI C header files... yes
checking for sys/types.h... yes
checking for sys/stat.h... yes
checking for stdlib.h... yes
checking for string.h... yes
checking for memory.h... yes
checking for strings.h... yes
checking for inttypes.h... yes
checking for stdint.h... yes
checking for unistd.h... yes
checking FlexLexer.h usability... yes
checking FlexLexer.h presence... yes
checking for FlexLexer.h... yes
checking for yyFlexLexer.yy_current_buffer... no
checking FlexLexer.h location... /usr/include/FlexLexer.h
checking language... English
checking for gettext in -lintl... no
checking for gettext... yes
checking for msgfmt... msgfmt
checking for mf-nowin... mf-nowin
checking for mpost... mpost
checking for working metafont mode... ljfour
checking for kpsewhich... kpsewhich
checking for guile-config... guile-config
checking guile-config version... 1.8.8
checking guile compile flags... -pthread
checking guile link flags... -pthread -lguile -lltdl
-Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -lgmp -lcrypt -lm -lltdl
checking libguile.h usability... yes
checking libguile.h presence... yes
checking for libguile.h... yes
checking for scm_boot_guile in -lguile... yes
checking for scm_boot_guile... yes
checking for scm_t_hash_fold_fn... no
checking for scm_t_hash_handle_fn... no
checking for scm_t_subr... no
checking for usable C++ demangler... yes
checking GUILE rational bugfix... ok
checking for python-config... python-config
checking Python.h usability... yes
checking Python.h presence... yes
checking for Python.h... yes
checking for gs... gs
checking for gs... /usr/bin/gs
checking /usr/bin/gs version... 9.05
checking for fontforge... fontforge
checking for fontforge... /usr/bin/fontforge
checking /usr/bin/fontforge version... 20110222
checking for fo
