Re: Output PDF to stdout
Hello Vlad,
You will not avoid intermediate files in any case, as Lilypond with gs output
will generate ps code, which is then turned into a pdf. If you want to pipe
PDFs for convenience you might create a wrapper say plilypond in the search
path doing something like this:
#!/bin/bash
t=$(mktemp) 1>&2
lilypond -o "$t" ${@} 1>&2
cat "$t".pdf
rm "$t".pdf 1>&2
Cheers,
Valentin
Am Donnerstag, 4. Jänner 2024, 23:34:28 CET schrieb Volodymyr Prokopyuk:
> Hi,
>
> I know that lilypond can receive a source.ly file from the stdin by
> using lilypond
> -. Is it possible for lilypond to output PDF to the stdout?
>
> My motivation behind using lilypond in a pipeline is to speed up PDF
> generation by avoiding storing intermediary files on disk. The pipeline I'd
> like to implement is
> cat source.ly | lintLy | lilypond - | optimizePDF > score.pdf
> Currently lilypond engraves PDF on disk, so a PDF optimizer has to read,
> optimize, and substitute PDF on disk.
>
> Thank you,
> Vlad
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Output PDF to stdout
On 13 Jan 2024, at 02:05, Curt McDowell wrote:Have you actually tried this? LilyPond appends ".pdf" to the output filename (and ".midi"). If you try to make the fifo ending in ".pdf", you find lilypond removes the fifo before writing a new file. For the same reasons, the output file cannot be /dev/stdout. Maybe you could write something exciting using FUSE or Docker.On 1/7/2024 5:41 AM, Raphael Mankin wrote:On 05/01/2024 03:46, David Wright wrote:Alternatively, use a fifo, e.g. fifo=/var/tmp/ly-pdf$$rm -rf $fifomknod $fifo pcat source.ly | lintLy | lilypond -o $fifo &optimizePDF < $fifo > score.pdfwaitrm -rf $fifoA trick I learned when doing Oracle backups. It also would not write to stdout.As an offtopic sidenote: even if it worked/works, according to the man-pages of mknod mkfifo should be preferred over mknod to create the FIFO."POSIX.1-2001 says: "The only portable use of mknod() is to create a FIFO-special file. If mode is not S_IFIFO or dev is not 0, the behavior of mknod() is unspecified." However, nowadays one should never use mknod() for this purpose; one should use mkfifo(3), a function especially defined for this purpose."
Re: Output PDF to stdout
Have you actually tried this? LilyPond appends ".pdf" to the output filename (and ".midi"). If you try to make the fifo ending in ".pdf", you find lilypond removes the fifo before writing a new file. For the same reasons, the output file cannot be /dev/stdout. Maybe you could write something exciting using FUSE or Docker. On 1/7/2024 5:41 AM, Raphael Mankin wrote: On 05/01/2024 03:46, David Wright wrote: Alternatively, use a fifo, e.g. fifo=/var/tmp/ly-pdf$$ rm -rf $fifo mknod $fifo p cat source.ly | lintLy | lilypond -o $fifo & optimizePDF < $fifo > score.pdf wait rm -rf $fifo A trick I learned when doing Oracle backups. It also would not write to stdout.
Re: Output PDF to stdout
On 05/01/2024 03:46, David Wright wrote:
On Thu 04 Jan 2024 at 23:34:28 (+0100), Volodymyr Prokopyuk wrote:
I know that lilypond can receive a source.ly file from the stdin by
using lilypond
-. Is it possible for lilypond to output PDF to the stdout?
My motivation behind using lilypond in a pipeline is to speed up PDF
generation by avoiding storing intermediary files on disk. The pipeline I'd
like to implement is
cat source.ly | lintLy | lilypond - | optimizePDF > score.pdf
Currently lilypond engraves PDF on disk, so a PDF optimizer has to read,
optimize, and substitute PDF on disk.
You could create a RAM disk to hold your intermediate files,
something along the lines of:
Ramdir="/dev/shm/${FUNCNAME[0]}$(printf '%(%s)T' -1)"
$ mkdir -p "$Ramdir"
The first line (which I run in a bash function, for a quite different
purpose) creates a pseudounique but recognizable name, and the second
line creates the directory.
Cheers,
David.
Alternatively, use a fifo, e.g.
fifo=/var/tmp/ly-pdf$$
rm -rf $fifo
mknod $fifo p
cat source.ly | lintLy | lilypond -o $fifo &
optimizePDF < $fifo > score.pdf
wait
rm -rf $fifo
A trick I learned when doing Oracle backups. It also would not write to
stdout.
--
Political correctness: a kind of McCarthyite movement in reverse which,
in the name of tolerance proscribes all reference to gender, ethnicity,
color of skin, sexual preference, social provenance and even age. It has
no leaders, as far as I am aware, only terrified disciples. - John le Carre
Re: Output PDF to stdout
Thank you very much for your thoughts!
I expected that the PDF output to stdout would be difficult to implement
due to multiple Lilypond backends, and, probably, is not a real bottleneck
in PDF generation. It is nice to know that intermediary files are already
handled by a FS cache, and can be externally optimized by using a RAM disk.
Thank you,
Vlad
On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 4:46 AM David Wright
wrote:
> On Thu 04 Jan 2024 at 23:34:28 (+0100), Volodymyr Prokopyuk wrote:
> >
> > I know that lilypond can receive a source.ly file from the stdin by
> > using lilypond
> > -. Is it possible for lilypond to output PDF to the stdout?
> >
> > My motivation behind using lilypond in a pipeline is to speed up PDF
> > generation by avoiding storing intermediary files on disk. The pipeline
> I'd
> > like to implement is
> > cat source.ly | lintLy | lilypond - | optimizePDF > score.pdf
> > Currently lilypond engraves PDF on disk, so a PDF optimizer has to read,
> > optimize, and substitute PDF on disk.
>
> You could create a RAM disk to hold your intermediate files,
> something along the lines of:
>
>Ramdir="/dev/shm/${FUNCNAME[0]}$(printf '%(%s)T' -1)"
> $ mkdir -p "$Ramdir"
>
> The first line (which I run in a bash function, for a quite different
> purpose) creates a pseudounique but recognizable name, and the second
> line creates the directory.
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>
Re: Output PDF to stdout
On Thu 04 Jan 2024 at 23:34:28 (+0100), Volodymyr Prokopyuk wrote:
>
> I know that lilypond can receive a source.ly file from the stdin by
> using lilypond
> -. Is it possible for lilypond to output PDF to the stdout?
>
> My motivation behind using lilypond in a pipeline is to speed up PDF
> generation by avoiding storing intermediary files on disk. The pipeline I'd
> like to implement is
> cat source.ly | lintLy | lilypond - | optimizePDF > score.pdf
> Currently lilypond engraves PDF on disk, so a PDF optimizer has to read,
> optimize, and substitute PDF on disk.
You could create a RAM disk to hold your intermediate files,
something along the lines of:
Ramdir="/dev/shm/${FUNCNAME[0]}$(printf '%(%s)T' -1)"
$ mkdir -p "$Ramdir"
The first line (which I run in a bash function, for a quite different
purpose) creates a pseudounique but recognizable name, and the second
line creates the directory.
Cheers,
David.
Re: Output PDF to stdout
On Fri, 5 Jan 2024, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > > intermediate "files" will be written to and read from the buffer cache at > > RAM speed and only later go to the disk in the background. > > That depends on the file system and its synchronization model. I once > sped up a script to control a cluster by more than factor 10 by avoiding > intermediate writes to the shared network filesystem of the cluster > nodes. That made the difference between 15 minutes and 30 seconds > runtime. I'm sure you're already aware of the important differences between that and the situation described in this thread. -- Matthew Skala msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before tribes. https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/
Re: Output PDF to stdout
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca writes: > On Thu, 4 Jan 2024, Volodymyr Prokopyuk wrote: > >> My motivation behind using lilypond in a pipeline is to speed up PDF >> generation by avoiding storing intermediary files on disk. The pipeline I'd > > Is that issue real? In Linux and most other operating systems, > intermediate "files" will be written to and read from the buffer cache at > RAM speed and only later go to the disk in the background. That depends on the file system and its synchronization model. I once sped up a script to control a cluster by more than factor 10 by avoiding intermediate writes to the shared network filesystem of the cluster nodes. That made the difference between 15 minutes and 30 seconds runtime. Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein, ohne es zu merken. draketo.de signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Output PDF to stdout
This doesn't exist, sorry. It wouldn't be *that* straightforward to implement, because there are multiple code paths for output (GhostScript via API, GhostScript via subprocess, SVG backend and Cairo). I'm not even sure that direct PDF output in GhostScript's PS → PDF conversion is not going through an intermediate file under the hood. Either way, I really doubt this would make a significant speed difference. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Output PDF to stdout
On Thu, 4 Jan 2024, Volodymyr Prokopyuk wrote: > My motivation behind using lilypond in a pipeline is to speed up PDF > generation by avoiding storing intermediary files on disk. The pipeline I'd Is that issue real? In Linux and most other operating systems, intermediate "files" will be written to and read from the buffer cache at RAM speed and only later go to the disk in the background. The subsequent process that uses the file won't be waiting for the disk I/O to complete. Even if a pipe might theoretically be even faster than the buffer cache, the intermediate unoptimized PDF is unlikely to be the bottleneck step in generation of an optimized PDF. -- Matthew Skala msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before tribes. https://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/
Re: output PDF
Welcome to LilyPond! Peter Jongh Visscher wrote > I started using Lilypond and the in the PDF output the first line(staff) > jumps a little bit forward(see Example) > > I can not find a command to set all the staff starting at the same point. For this, use "indent = #0" in the \layout block as shown here: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/line-length#index-indent-4 Cheers, -Paul -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/output-PDF-tp170381p170385.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: output PDF
Hi Peter,
> I started using Lilypond
Welcome to the ‘Pond!! =)
> I can not find a command to set all the staff starting at the same point.
\paper { indent = 0\in }
See
for more information on how to control horizontal spacing things like paper
size and margins.
Hope this helps!
Kieren.
___
Kieren MacMillan, composer
www:
email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: output PDF
Peter:
Use:
\layout { indent = #0 }
Mark
From: lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org
[mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of
Peter Jongh Visscher
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 7:55 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: output PDF
I started using Lilypond and the in the PDF output the first line(staff)
jumps a little bit forward(see Example)
I can not find a command to set all the staff starting at the same point.
Met vriendelijke groet,
Peter Jongh Visscher
Stationsweg 172
1852 LN HEILOO
telefoon +31 (0)72 532 1728
mobiel +31 (0)615 418 434
e-mailpe...@pljv.nl
De informatie verzonden met dit e-mail bericht kan vertrouwelijk zijn en is
uitsluitend bestemd voor de geadresseerde.
Gebruik van deze informatie door anderen dan geadresseerde is verboden.
Openbaarmaking, vermenigvuldiging, verspreiding en/of verstrekking van deze
informatie aan derden is niet toegestaan.
"De aarde is geen geschenk van onze ouders, hij is aan ons in bruikleen
gegeven door onze kinderen." (Indiaans spreekwoord)
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: output PDF
At 16:54 12/01/2015 +0100, Peter Jongh Visscher wrote:
I started using Lilypond and the in the PDF output the first line
(staff) jumps a little bit forward (see Example)
I can not find a command to set all the staff starting at the same point.
Try:
\layout { indent = #0 }
I trust this helps.
Brian Barker
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Output PDF has different chord font than expected
Xavier,
Thank you for explaining the root cause of this frustrating problem.
Based on your solution, I am now able to use the chord font of my choice by
adding the following snippet at the top of my source file (in this case
Verdana, which ships natively with Win7)
\paper {
#(define fonts
(make-pango-font-tree "Times New Roman"
"Verdana"
"Luxi Mono"
(/ staff-height pt 20)))
}
Your help is greatly appreciated!
Greg
From: Xavier Scheuer
To: mayornancy
Cc: "lilypond-user@gnu.org"
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: Output PDF has different chord font than expected
On 27 February 2013 20:29, mayornancy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am using lilypond (2.16.2) on Windows7 SP1 in "portable" mode (I simply
> extracted the installer to a folder).
>
> After compiling the following Chord example found at:
>
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.12/input/lsr/lilypond-snippets/Chords#Single-staff-template-with-notes-and-chords
>
> my result PDF chord symbols are using a very different font than the example
> output shown on the webpage (please see attached png)
>
>
> Is there some registry/environment setting I have to manually adjust in
> order for the default lilypond chord font to be used?
Apparently it's a Windows bug.
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2012-12/msg00542.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/17/windows_security_update_kills_fonts/
Define New Century Schoolbook as default roman (serif) font, thanks to
explanations from NR 1.8.3 Fonts > Entire document fonts
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/fonts.html#entire-document-fonts
Cheers,
Xavier
--
Xavier Scheuer ___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Output PDF has different chord font than expected
On 27 February 2013 20:29, mayornancy wrote: > Hello, > > I am using lilypond (2.16.2) on Windows7 SP1 in "portable" mode (I simply > extracted the installer to a folder). > > After compiling the following Chord example found at: > > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.12/input/lsr/lilypond-snippets/Chords#Single-staff-template-with-notes-and-chords > > my result PDF chord symbols are using a very different font than the example > output shown on the webpage (please see attached png) > > > Is there some registry/environment setting I have to manually adjust in > order for the default lilypond chord font to be used? Apparently it's a Windows bug. http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2012-12/msg00542.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/17/windows_security_update_kills_fonts/ Define New Century Schoolbook as default roman (serif) font, thanks to explanations from NR 1.8.3 Fonts > Entire document fonts http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/fonts.html#entire-document-fonts Cheers, Xavier -- Xavier Scheuer ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Output PDF has different chord font than expected
Federico, Thanks for your suggestion. I downloaded and installed the font families from your screenshot (all 3 were missing from my PC), but this has not solved the problem. I can reproduce the same font problem on a second PC (running Win7 x64). Any other ideas? Greg From: Federico Bruni To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 4:27 PM Subject: Re: Output PDF has different chord font than expected Il 27/02/2013 20:29, mayornancy ha scritto: > After compiling the following Chord example found at: > > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.12/input/lsr/lilypond-snippets/Chords#Single-staff-template-with-notes-and-chords > > my result PDF chord symbols are using a very different font than the > example output shown on the webpage (please see attached png) Actually the fonts are the same even in the latest version: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/snippets/chords#chords-single-staff-template-with-notes-and-chords I guess that your operating system is missing the fonts required. My system (Linux) is using the fonts you see in the attached image. -- Federico ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Output PDF has different chord font than expected
Il 27/02/2013 20:29, mayornancy ha scritto: After compiling the following Chord example found at: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.12/input/lsr/lilypond-snippets/Chords#Single-staff-template-with-notes-and-chords my result PDF chord symbols are using a very different font than the example output shown on the webpage (please see attached png) Actually the fonts are the same even in the latest version: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/snippets/chords#chords-single-staff-template-with-notes-and-chords I guess that your operating system is missing the fonts required. My system (Linux) is using the fonts you see in the attached image. -- Federico <>___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
