Re: upgrading a songbook from 2.14 to 2.18

[Maurits Lamers]

Hi,

> Op 2 sep. 2020, om 21:07 heeft David Kastrup  het volgende 
> geschreven:
> 
> Maurits Lamers  writes:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>>> convert-ly does text replacements.  It is not a full parser.  If text
>>> replacements are supposed to work, you need to write your text in a way
>>> that the replacement patterns cover.  Stuff like putting # on one line
>>> and a corresponding opening paren on the next line are just too weird
>>> for those writing the conversion rules to have foreseen.
>>> 
>>> So first try formatting your source in a somewhat common manner and then
>>> try running convert-ly.
>> 
>> I did notice this way of indenting though and changed it before
>> running Lilypond, but I didn't anticipate that convert-ly would also
>> check for scheme code patterns.
> 
> It doesn't "check" for style.  It catches some patterns and converts
> them and overlooks others.
> 
> The 2.14 to 2.16 upgrade overhauled # syntax significantly, changed the
> meaning of $ for LilyPond, changed the meaning of $ in embedded Scheme
> inside of #{ #}, replaced #(ly:export ...) with $... and a few other
> comparatively invasive things, all using regular expressions.
> 
> It did a pretty good job on LilyPond's own code base formatted in
> LilyPond's own style, but things like # or
> #( are so unusual that they have not made it into the
> patterns.

There is indeed only so much that can be caught.
I now got things to work, so thanks a lot!
There is one little thing you might know the answer to. I referred earlier to 
this alignGrob code which came from the lilypond-user mailing list.

This function is defined like this:

alignGrob = #(define-music-function (parser location grob-to-align 
reference-grob dir corr) (string? symbol? integer? number?)
  #{
 \overrideProperty  $grob-to-align #'after-line-breaking #(lambda (grob)

and called like this: 

\alignGrob "Score.RehearsalMark" #'StaffSymbol #1 #0

It ran into an error, telling that Score.RehearsalMark was an invalid property 
path.
So, I made a test file with the following line: \overrideProperty 
Score.RehearsalMark #'after-line-breaking #(lambda (grob) ) 
and ran this through convert-ly, which resulted in this line being rewritten as 
\overrideProperty Score.RehearsalMark.after-line-breaking.
I managed to that the alignGrob function working by replacing 
#'after-line-breaking with .after-line-breaking, but I had to leave a space 
between $grob-to-align and .after-line-breaking.
After replacing this, I ran a file successfully, so that seems to work as 
required.

Two questions about this though: 
1. is this space inbetween going to cause any trouble in the future?
2. is there another way to insert the $grob-to-align string where the space 
doesn't have to be there?

cheers and thanks!

Maurits

Re: upgrading a songbook from 2.14 to 2.18

[David Kastrup]

David Kastrup  writes:

> Maurits Lamers  writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> convert-ly does text replacements.  It is not a full parser.  If text
>>> replacements are supposed to work, you need to write your text in a way
>>> that the replacement patterns cover.  Stuff like putting # on one line
>>> and a corresponding opening paren on the next line are just too weird
>>> for those writing the conversion rules to have foreseen.
>>> 
>>> So first try formatting your source in a somewhat common manner and then
>>> try running convert-ly.
>>
>> I did notice this way of indenting though and changed it before
>> running Lilypond, but I didn't anticipate that convert-ly would also
>> check for scheme code patterns.
>
> It doesn't "check" for style.  It catches some patterns and converts
> them and overlooks others.
>
> The 2.14 to 2.16 upgrade overhauled # syntax significantly, changed the
> meaning of $ for LilyPond, changed the meaning of $ in embedded Scheme
> inside of #{ #}, replaced #(ly:export ...) with $... and a few other
> comparatively invasive things, all using regular expressions.

Start and end of sentence don't fit together.  The "all using regular
expressions" concerns how convert-ly upgrades source files.  The
invasive changes, of course, were to LilyPond itself.  Sorry for losing
my own context here.

>
> It did a pretty good job on LilyPond's own code base formatted in
> LilyPond's own style, but things like # or
> #( are so unusual that they have not made it into the
> patterns.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: upgrading a songbook from 2.14 to 2.18

[David Kastrup]

Maurits Lamers  writes:

> Hi,
>
>> convert-ly does text replacements.  It is not a full parser.  If text
>> replacements are supposed to work, you need to write your text in a way
>> that the replacement patterns cover.  Stuff like putting # on one line
>> and a corresponding opening paren on the next line are just too weird
>> for those writing the conversion rules to have foreseen.
>> 
>> So first try formatting your source in a somewhat common manner and then
>> try running convert-ly.
>
> I did notice this way of indenting though and changed it before
> running Lilypond, but I didn't anticipate that convert-ly would also
> check for scheme code patterns.

It doesn't "check" for style.  It catches some patterns and converts
them and overlooks others.

The 2.14 to 2.16 upgrade overhauled # syntax significantly, changed the
meaning of $ for LilyPond, changed the meaning of $ in embedded Scheme
inside of #{ #}, replaced #(ly:export ...) with $... and a few other
comparatively invasive things, all using regular expressions.

It did a pretty good job on LilyPond's own code base formatted in
LilyPond's own style, but things like # or
#( are so unusual that they have not made it into the
patterns.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: upgrading a songbook from 2.14 to 2.18

[Maurits Lamers]

Hi,

> convert-ly does text replacements.  It is not a full parser.  If text
> replacements are supposed to work, you need to write your text in a way
> that the replacement patterns cover.  Stuff like putting # on one line
> and a corresponding opening paren on the next line are just too weird
> for those writing the conversion rules to have foreseen.
> 
> So first try formatting your source in a somewhat common manner and then
> try running convert-ly.

I did notice this way of indenting though and changed it before running 
Lilypond, but I didn't anticipate that convert-ly would also check for scheme 
code patterns.

Thanks for the hint, will try this.

cheers

Maurits

Re: upgrading a songbook from 2.14 to 2.18

[David Kastrup]

Maurits Lamers  writes:

> Hi all,
>
> In order to have my braille generator not have to support Lilypond 2.14 I 
> tried to upgrade my music library I am building this braille generator on.
>
> However, because of (a lot of) specific "hacks" on the layout, simply running 
> convert-ly on the entire library doesn't completely finish the job.
> These overrides use a specific syntax to distinguish between the scheme part 
> and the lilypond part, also inside function definitions.
> The following function is an example of this. It is defined as a scheme 
> function, but uses Lilypond syntax inside which is put between #{ and #}.
>
> These kind of definitions seem to cause all kinds of issues. 
> One of these issues can be found in a piece of code taken from the 
> lilypond-user mailing list 
> (https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2011-03/msg00270.html 
> ) of 
> which I will only include the start:
>
> 
>
> alignGrob =
> #(define-music-function (parser location grob-to-align reference-grob dir 
> corr) (string? symbol? integer? number?)
>   #{
>  \overrideProperty  $grob-to-align #'after-line-breaking
>  #(lambda (grob)
> (let* ((sys (ly:grob-system grob))
>
>
> 
>
> The lambda expression on the fifth line of this definition causes a "warning: 
> ignoring non-musical expression".
>
> Another example is in the function below.
>
> 
>
> stanza = #
> (define-music-function (parser location str)
>   (string?)
>   #{ 
> \set stanza = #
>  (markup #:stanza-number 
>(string-append $str "")) #})
> 
>
> In this function, the line with '\set stanza causes an GUILE error:
> "unbound variable str" wherever this function is applied.

convert-ly does text replacements.  It is not a full parser.  If text
replacements are supposed to work, you need to write your text in a way
that the replacement patterns cover.  Stuff like putting # on one line
and a corresponding opening paren on the next line are just too weird
for those writing the conversion rules to have foreseen.

So first try formatting your source in a somewhat common manner and then
try running convert-ly.

-- 
David Kastrup

upgrading a songbook from 2.14 to 2.18

[Maurits Lamers]

Hi all,

In order to have my braille generator not have to support Lilypond 2.14 I tried 
to upgrade my music library I am building this braille generator on.

However, because of (a lot of) specific "hacks" on the layout, simply running 
convert-ly on the entire library doesn't completely finish the job.
These overrides use a specific syntax to distinguish between the scheme part 
and the lilypond part, also inside function definitions.
The following function is an example of this. It is defined as a scheme 
function, but uses Lilypond syntax inside which is put between #{ and #}.

These kind of definitions seem to cause all kinds of issues. 
One of these issues can be found in a piece of code taken from the 
lilypond-user mailing list 
(https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2011-03/msg00270.html 
) of 
which I will only include the start:



alignGrob =
#(define-music-function (parser location grob-to-align reference-grob dir corr) 
(string? symbol? integer? number?)
  #{
 \overrideProperty  $grob-to-align #'after-line-breaking
 #(lambda (grob)
(let* ((sys (ly:grob-system grob))




The lambda expression on the fifth line of this definition causes a "warning: 
ignoring non-musical expression".

Another example is in the function below.



stanza = #
(define-music-function (parser location str)
  (string?)
  #{ 
\set stanza = #
 (markup #:stanza-number 
   (string-append $str "")) #})


In this function, the line with '\set stanza causes an GUILE error: "unbound 
variable str" wherever this function is applied.


So, I see two options here: either something changed around the use of the #{ 
and #} and any embedded scheme between 2.14 and 2.18, or the 
define-music-function argument list is incorrect. If I remember correctly, the 
last one only changed between 2.18 and 2.20.
Are there options that I missed?

cheers and thanks in advance!

Maurits

Re: upgrading lilypond

[Bill via lilypond-user]

 Thank you so very much Aaron!
Seems like it worked well.  I added the new release in my home directory since 
trying to uninstall 2.18.2 with Synaptic Package Manager would also uninstall 
Frescobaldi.Frescobaldi allows two or more versions to be accessed.
We'll see if this was the right decision.

So much to learn...

  |This is an installation script, not a package.  To my knowledge, it 
has 

nothing to do with any package managers.

As such, you will first need to use your package manager to manually 
uninstall any existing LilyPond package if you have one that you want to 
replace.  Then you can simply run 'sudo sh 
lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh' (no extra arguments needed) and follow 
the prompts.  This will install under /usr/local/lilypond with a 
shortcut under /usr/local/bin by default.

An alternative is to install LilyPond to your home directory for a 
user-specific installation.  This will be independent of any other 
installation, meaning you do not need to futz with any package managers. 
  In this case, do not use 'sudo'.  Just run 'sh 
lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh'.  By default, it will install under 
/~/lilypond with a shortcut under /~/bin.


-- Aaron Hill
 
 
 
-Original Message-
From: lilypond-user-request 
To: lilypond-user 
Sent: Fri, Aug 9, 2019 4:38 pm
Subject: lilypond-user Digest, Vol 201, Issue 30

Send lilypond-user mailing list submissions to
    lilypond-user@gnu.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    lilypond-user-requ...@gnu.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    lilypond-user-ow...@gnu.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of lilypond-user digest..."
Today's Topics:

  1. Re:drop down list (yming tsang)
  2. Re:LilyPond and FontForge (fasola)
  3. score wizard (wmil...@aol.com)
  4. upgrading to 2.19.83-1 from 2.18.2 on Linux Mint (wmil...@aol.com)
  5. Re:upgrading to 2.19.83-1 from 2.18.2 on Linux Mint (Aaron Hill)
 !-- #yiv5048139729 _filtered #yiv5048139729 {font-family:"Cambria 
Math";panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv5048139729 
{font-family:DengXian;panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} _filtered #yiv5048139729 
{font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv5048139729 
{panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;} #yiv5048139729 #yiv5048139729 
p.yiv5048139729MsoNormal, #yiv5048139729 li.yiv5048139729MsoNormal, 
#yiv5048139729 div.yiv5048139729MsoNormal 
{margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri", 
sans-serif;} #yiv5048139729 a:link, #yiv5048139729 
span.yiv5048139729MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;} 
#yiv5048139729 .yiv5048139729MsoChpDefault {} _filtered #yiv5048139729 
{margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;} #yiv5048139729 
div.yiv5048139729WordSection1 {} --Hi Ben,   Thank you very much for in 
info about drop down entries with frecobaldi. Yes I am a window 10 user.I 
manage to run regedit and now mi drop down list is clean up.  Thank you.   One 
question:  how can I sort the drop down list?  OR is it  automatically sorted? 
I had lot of Chinese character entry.   Thank you,Ming   Sent from Mail for 
Windows 10   I may be having the same problem. I'm using FontForge to make 
adjustments to
the shapenote note heads in emmentaler so they are more readable. This
involves changing the width of some symbols. When I generate my custom
version of emmentaler, some of the note heads don't line up with the stems.
Perhaps the problem is the LILC, LILF, and LILY tables? Could someone please
explain how to update them? Help greatly appreciated!



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html



good to know Urs about the frescobaldi.conf file.  I want to modify the wizard 
and I saw that I can do that more than I realized in the settings, parts and 
Titles and Headings tabs which is amazing and very helpful.I guess I thought 
from the other post the three (settings, parts and Titles and Headings) tabs 
were also modifiable. Perhaps I was confused by the post by Ming saying that 
subsubtitle has a drop down menu as on my version it is a fill-in blank.   I do 
not need to modify them the tabs as I now realize that any info inputted to 
score wizard is saved unless  is press and if one still wants to edit 
score wizard and yet save the inputted info one can create a file and save it 
as a template for future starting point.


> ./.config/frescobaldi
> ./.config/frescobaldi/frescobaldi.conf

This last file is Frescobaldi's configuration file on Linux, storing the same 
data as does the Windows registr.
However, you are not intended to manually edit this file, except to fix things 
that have gone wrong for whatever reason.

> 
> Is it possible to modify the wizard in Linux?

What exactly is it you want to "modify&

Re: upgrading to 2.19.83-1 from 2.18.2 on Linux Mint

[David Kastrup]

Aaron Hill  writes:

> On 2019-08-09 4:16 pm, Bill via lilypond-user wrote:
>> Oh well I tried
>> i downloaded
>>
>> lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh
>> from this
>> GNU/Linux 64: LilyPond 2.19.83-1
>>  buttonat
>>
>> http://lilypond.org/development.html
>> I tried to upgrade using Synaptic package Manager but that only showed
>> 2.18.2 which i have installed.
>
> This is an installation script, not a package.  To my knowledge, it
> has nothing to do with any package managers.
>
> As such, you will first need to use your package manager to manually
> uninstall any existing LilyPond package if you have one that you want
> to replace.

Not even that.  /usr/local/bin takes priority over /usr/bin so there is
usually no harm in keeping the system LilyPond as well.  You can still
call it with explicit path if you want to compare results.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: upgrading to 2.19.83-1 from 2.18.2 on Linux Mint

[Aaron Hill]

On 2019-08-09 4:16 pm, Bill via lilypond-user wrote:

Oh well I tried
i downloaded

lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh
from this
GNU/Linux 64: LilyPond 2.19.83-1
 buttonat

http://lilypond.org/development.html
I tried to upgrade using Synaptic package Manager but that only showed
2.18.2 which i have installed.


This is an installation script, not a package.  To my knowledge, it has 
nothing to do with any package managers.


As such, you will first need to use your package manager to manually 
uninstall any existing LilyPond package if you have one that you want to 
replace.  Then you can simply run 'sudo sh 
lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh' (no extra arguments needed) and follow 
the prompts.  This will install under /usr/local/lilypond with a 
shortcut under /usr/local/bin by default.


An alternative is to install LilyPond to your home directory for a 
user-specific installation.  This will be independent of any other 
installation, meaning you do not need to futz with any package managers. 
 In this case, do not use 'sudo'.  Just run 'sh 
lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh'.  By default, it will install under 
/~/lilypond with a shortcut under /~/bin.



-- Aaron Hill

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

upgrading to 2.19.83-1 from 2.18.2 on Linux Mint

[Bill via lilypond-user]

Oh well I tried
i downloaded 

lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh
from this
GNU/Linux 64: LilyPond 2.19.83-1
 buttonat 

http://lilypond.org/development.html
I tried to upgrade using Synaptic package Manager but that only showed 2.18.2 
which i have installed.

So, I read up on sh files and got this far
sudo sh lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh --help
lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh - install LilyPond tarball
Options
  --batch no interaction
  --doc   [attempt to] download and install documentation
  --prefix PREFIX install into PREFIX/lilypond (default: /usr/local)
  --help  this help
  --tarball   extract tar file for archive

perhaps I am just one step away but I am willing to wait for confirmation if I 
am supposed to type this:
sudo lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh - install LilyPond tarball or

sudo lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh - install LilyPond --tarball
or 

sudo lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64.sh -tarball
one last attempt
sudo pip install --upgrade lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64
gave me this error messageERROR: Could not find a version that satisfies the 
requirement lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64 (from versions: none)
ERROR: No matching distribution found for lilypond-2.19.83-1.linux-64
removing the -1.linux-64 didn't help one bit either.

Thank you so very much for your help...
Perplexed Bill Milmoe
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading

[Knute Snortum]

I would try going to the command line and typing where lilypond.  This
will tell you all the places LilyPond is installed.


Knute Snortum
(via Gmail)

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Daniel Contreras daniel.c.9...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hello everyone,
 I'm installing Lily Pond on my Windows machine now. Well trying to. I have
 an old version 2.12 installed here, I uninstalled it and try to install the
 latest stable release. However when I finish installation and run the
 example file, diversion statement says 2.12. Is there something wrong here?
 Am I doing something wrong? Thank you for any help

 Daniel Contreras
 ___
 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

Upgrading

[Daniel Contreras]

Hello everyone,
I'm installing Lily Pond on my Windows machine now. Well trying to. I have an 
old version 2.12 installed here, I uninstalled it and try to install the latest 
stable release. However when I finish installation and run the example file, 
diversion statement says 2.12. Is there something wrong here? Am I doing 
something wrong? Thank you for any help

Daniel Contreras 
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Marcin Gryszkalis]

On 20.04.2014 23:02, Janek Warchoł wrote:
 https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets/tree/master/notation-snippets/adjust-horizontal-spacing

That's it, worked like a charm :) I thought one can only use 1/(2^n) as
moment... Thanks

regards
-- 
Marcin Gryszkalis, PGP 0xA5DBEEC7
jabber jid:m...@fork.pl, gg:2532994


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

Re: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Vaughan McAlley]

On 22 April 2014 09:06, Marcin Gryszkalis m...@fork.pl wrote:

 On 20.04.2014 23:02, Janek Warchoł wrote:
  https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets/tree/master/notation-snippets/adjust-horizontal-spacing

 That's it, worked like a charm :) I thought one can only use 1/(2^n) as
 moment... Thanks

 regards
 --
 Marcin Gryszkalis, PGP 0xA5DBEEC7
 jabber jid:m...@fork.pl, gg:2532994


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

Just out of curiosity, is there any list of changes between 2.18.0 and 2.18.2?

(I can’t find it if it exists...)

Vaughan

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

too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Marcin Gryszkalis]

Hi
After upgrading to 2.18.2 I noticed that scores are engraved with more space,
causing different splits (and in one particular example my son was working on
- I cannot fit it on one page anymore).

You can see example:
http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo-2-18-1.pdf
http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo-2-18-2.pdf
http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo.ly

I played a bit with SpacingSpanner/base-shortest-duration and other parameters
but without luck.

Are there any known important changes between lilypond versions that would
cause such change in spacing?

best regards
-- 
Marcin Gryszkalis, PGP 0xA5DBEEC7
jabber jid:m...@fork.pl, gg:2532994


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

Re: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Phil Holmes]

- Original Message - 
From: Marcin Gryszkalis m...@fork.pl

To: lilypond-user mailinglist lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 11:21 AM
Subject: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2



Hi
After upgrading to 2.18.2 I noticed that scores are engraved with more 
space,
causing different splits (and in one particular example my son was working 
on

- I cannot fit it on one page anymore).

You can see example:
http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo-2-18-1.pdf
http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo-2-18-2.pdf
http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo.ly

I played a bit with SpacingSpanner/base-shortest-duration and other 
parameters

but without luck.

Are there any known important changes between lilypond versions that would
cause such change in spacing?

best regards
--
Marcin Gryszkalis, PGP 0xA5DBEEC7
jabber jid:m...@fork.pl, gg:2532994



2.18.1 was never actually released: how did you get it?

--
Phil Holmes 



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

Odp: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Karol Majewski]

Hi Marcin.

There was this big spacing issue 3304, which was fixed between 2.18.1 and 
2.18.2.

https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3304

I think this could be the reason.


--Karol

 Hi
 After upgrading to 2.18.2 I noticed that scores are engraved with more 
 space,
 causing different splits (and in one particular example my son was 
 working on
 - I cannot fit it on one page anymore).
 
 You can see example:
 http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo-2-18-1.pdf
 http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo-2-18-2.pdf
 http://stuff.fork.pl/rondo.ly
 
 I played a bit with SpacingSpanner/base-shortest-duration and other 
 parameters
 but without luck.
 
 Are there any known important changes between lilypond versions that would
 cause such change in spacing?
 
 best regards
 --
 Marcin Gryszkalis, PGP 0xA5DBEEC7
 jabber jid:m...@fork.pl, gg:2532994
 
 
 ___
 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: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Phil Holmes]

- Original Message - 
From: Karol Majewski karo...@wp.pl

To: Marcin Gryszkalis m...@fork.pl
Cc: lilypond-user mailinglist lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 11:34 AM
Subject: Odp: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2



Hi Marcin.

There was this big spacing issue 3304, which was fixed between 2.18.1 and 
2.18.2.


https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3304

I think this could be the reason.




Also, simply deleting all the forced line breaks fits the piece on one page!

--
Phil Holmes 



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

Re: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Marcin Gryszkalis]

On 20.04.2014 12:56, Phil Holmes wrote:
 Also, simply deleting all the forced line breaks fits the piece on one
 page!

That's right - though I wanted to have line break every 4th bar (as you can
see on 2.18.1 sample).


 2.18.1 was never actually released: how did you get it?

Gentoo linux portage
http://packages.gentoo.org/package/media-sound/lilypond


On 20.04.2014 12:34, Karol Majewski wrote:
 There was this big spacing issue 3304, which was fixed between 2.18.1 and 
 2.18.2. https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3304 
 I think this could be the reason.

It looks to be tuplet related and there are no tuplets in my score, but I
don't really know much about lilypond internals.

The final question is - is there anything that can be forced to achieve
narrower space? From my (La)TeX background - I know that trying too hard to
force TeX to do something usually ends in total failure ;) but still


best regards
-- 
Marcin Gryszkalis, PGP 0xA5DBEEC7
jabber jid:m...@fork.pl, gg:2532994

[!] Note: new PGP/GPG Key (0xA5DBEEC7) - http://fork.pl/gpg.txt

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

Re: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Janek Warchoł]

2014-04-20 19:55 GMT+02:00 Marcin Gryszkalis m...@fork.pl:
 On 20.04.2014 12:34, Karol Majewski wrote:
 There was this big spacing issue 3304, which was fixed between 2.18.1 and
 2.18.2. https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3304
 I think this could be the reason.

 It looks to be tuplet related and there are no tuplets in my score, but I
 don't really know much about lilypond internals.

It's not just about tuplets.

 The final question is - is there anything that can be forced to achieve
 narrower space?

Lol, that's a funny joke!
The question is not whether this is possible, but how hard/easy it is.

 From my (La)TeX background - I know that trying too hard to
 force TeX to do something usually ends in total failure ;) but still

https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets/tree/master/notation-snippets/adjust-horizontal-spacing

btw, putting manual breaks all over the place does not look like a
good strategy for me...

best,
Janek

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

Re: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2

[Phil Holmes]

- Original Message - 
From: Marcin Gryszkalis m...@fork.pl

To: Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net; Karol Majewski karo...@wp.pl
Cc: lilypond-user mailinglist lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: too wide score after upgrading 2.18.1 to 2.18.2



On 20.04.2014 12:56, Phil Holmes wrote:

Also, simply deleting all the forced line breaks fits the piece on one
page!


That's right - though I wanted to have line break every 4th bar (as you 
can

see on 2.18.1 sample).



2.18.1 was never actually released: how did you get it?


Gentoo linux portage
http://packages.gentoo.org/package/media-sound/lilypond


On 20.04.2014 12:34, Karol Majewski wrote:

There was this big spacing issue 3304, which was fixed between 2.18.1 and
2.18.2. https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3304
I think this could be the reason.


It looks to be tuplet related and there are no tuplets in my score, but I
don't really know much about lilypond internals.

The final question is - is there anything that can be forced to achieve
narrower space? From my (La)TeX background - I know that trying too hard 
to

force TeX to do something usually ends in total failure ;) but still


Try putting the \layout section where it should be: after the music, and 
experiment with


\override SpacingSpanner.common-shortest-duration = #(ly:make-moment 1/n)


--
Phil Holmes 



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

Re: A documentation suggestion, was: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Marek Klein]

2012/10/28 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com

 On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 11:09 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
  Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
  +1 for updating documentation.
 
  Would make sense for the bug squad to register the proposal.  I don't
  think it would be suitable in the proposed form but that does not mean
  we should ignore it.

 Forwarded to bug-lilypond.  Bug Squad, please look at A documentation
 suggestion, was: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading
 to the new stable version thread on -user.


This has been added as
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2943

Marek
bug squad member
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: A documentation suggestion, was: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Janek Warchoł]

+1 for updating documentation.

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 3:05 PM, james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Perhaps there is a much simpler solution. Notation reference, 1.3.1 is where 
 I got the example which I have been using since at least 2.12, because  
 centering such a new dynamic is probably rarer than having it left-aligned, I 
 think it would be useful to note that there's an easy way of doing this. A 
 minor change from the example in the documentation.

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Janek Warchoł]

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Kevin Patrick Barry barr...@tcd.ie wrote:
 Dear LilyPond users,

 I have found the recent debate about the difficulty of using LilyPond
 interesting and would like to offer my experience, as someone who has
 been using it for about six months.  I apologise if this is a bit
 long.

Not at all, thanks for your feedback!  I'm crossing fingers for your project :)
Janek

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

Re: A documentation suggestion, was: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Kastrup]

Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:

 On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 3:05 PM, james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com wrote:
 Perhaps there is a much simpler solution. Notation reference, 1.3.1
 is where I got the example which I have been using since at least
 2.12, because centering such a new dynamic is probably rarer than
 having it left-aligned, I think it would be useful to note that
 there's an easy way of doing this. A minor change from the example
 in the documentation.


 +1 for updating documentation.

Would make sense for the bug squad to register the proposal.  I don't
think it would be suitable in the proposed form but that does not mean
we should ignore it.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: A documentation suggestion, was: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Janek Warchoł]

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 11:09 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
 +1 for updating documentation.

 Would make sense for the bug squad to register the proposal.  I don't
 think it would be suitable in the proposed form but that does not mean
 we should ignore it.

Forwarded to bug-lilypond.  Bug Squad, please look at A documentation
suggestion, was: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading
to the new stable version thread on -user.

Janek

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[james]

On Oct 26, 2012, at 8:15 PM, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
 It would be very helpful to us if you can find some time to *exactly*
 point out what background knowledge you are missing.  

Knowing what you don't know is always difficult. However, here's an example 
where the answer to my question was a bit above my level of understanding. 
Granted, the question was a bit above my level of understanding…

On Sep 7, 2012, at 1:48 AM, David Nalesnik wrote:

 Hi James,
 
 On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:00 PM, james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com wrote:
 I don't really understand it, but I can modify the examples of how to create 
 custom dynamics to get what I want.
 I have a document with several examples like:
 rinforzamf = #(
  make-dynamic-script (
 markup #:line (
 #:left-align
 #:normal-text
 #:whiteout
 #:italic rinforza
 #:hspace 0
 #:whiteout
 #:dynamic mf
 )
 )
 )
 And a macro that left-aligns it:
 leftalign = { \once \override Dynamics.DynamicText #'self-alignment-X = #-1 }
 
 Heretofore, I've just been manually adding the \leftalign before the 
 \rinforzamf (for example). Is there a way to get both of these in one 
 command?
 
 
 With the following definitions, you can get what you want with a
 single command.  Also, you can define other such combinations.
 
 (BTW, I commented out two lines in the markup definition which I don't
 think are needed.)
 
 HTH,
 David
 
 %
 
 \version 2.17.1
 
 #(define (rinforza text)
 (let* ((text
   (markup
 #:line (
   ;#:left-align
   #:normal-text
   #:whiteout
   #:italic rinforza
   ;#:hspace 0
   #:whiteout
   #:dynamic text)))
   (my-dyn (make-music 'AbsoluteDynamicEvent
   'text text)))
 (set! (ly:music-property my-dyn 'tweaks)
 (acons 'self-alignment-X -1
(ly:music-property my-dyn 'tweaks)))
 my-dyn))
 
 rinforzamf = #(rinforza mf)
 rinforzap = #(rinforza p)
 
 \score {
 \new Staff 
 { c'1 d' c' d' }
 \new Dynamics {
   s1*2\rinforzamf
   s1*2\rinforzap
 }
 
 }

Hello, I'm having some difficulty understanding how to integrate this into my 
document. Is is possible to just add  (acons 'self-alignment-X -1 into the 
existing structure, and if so, where? Or does that not work?

 While LilyPond
 can't give a detailed introduction into Scheme, the example code is
 intended to be understandable in most cases even by people who don't
 have experience with Scheme.

I understand the bits that are clearly markup modifiers, but everything else is 
greek to me.
 
 Maybe examples can be extended and/or reduced to make them easier to
 comprehend.
 
It's not the examples in the documentation, or at least, I understand all of 
the documentation except for the introduction to scheme, which is fine for me, 
since I don't use scheme.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Kastrup]

james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com writes:

 On Oct 26, 2012, at 8:15 PM, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
 It would be very helpful to us if you can find some time to *exactly*
 point out what background knowledge you are missing.  

 Knowing what you don't know is always difficult. However, here's an
 example where the answer to my question was a bit above my level of
 understanding. Granted, the question was a bit above my level of
 understanding…

 On Sep 7, 2012, at 1:48 AM, David Nalesnik wrote:

 Hi James,
 
 On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:00 PM, james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com wrote:
 I don't really understand it, but I can modify the examples of how to 
 create custom dynamics to get what I want.
 I have a document with several examples like:
 rinforzamf = #(
  make-dynamic-script (
 markup #:line (
 #:left-align
 #:normal-text
 #:whiteout
 #:italic rinforza
 #:hspace 0
 #:whiteout
 #:dynamic mf
 )
 )
 )

This is formatted in a way not corresponding with the actual function of
parens in Scheme.  You are not doing yourself a favor by pretending to
be working with a different language.  For one thing, the analogies
evoked by your formatting fall down in more complex cases.  For another,
you will have a harder time communicating with other people, as they are
unaccustomed to your way of speaking and vice versa.

And probably not be sneezed at: convert-ly works by hand-crafted rules
and pattern matching.  It does not actually understand either LilyPond
or Scheme.  If you are writing in patterns different from the patterns
everybody else uses, tools created for LilyPond users will often fail
because of violated assumptions.

At any rate, in LilyPond 2.16 you _can_ write the above as
rinforzamf =
#(make-dynamic-script
  #{ \markup \line { \left-align \normal-text \whiteout \italic rinforza
 \hspace #0
 \whiteout \dynamic mf }
  #})

which is likely more accessible to further manipulation.


 And a macro that left-aligns it:
 leftalign = { \once \override Dynamics.DynamicText #'self-alignment-X = #-1 
 }
 
 Heretofore, I've just been manually adding the \leftalign before the 
 \rinforzamf (for example). Is there a way to get both of these in one 
 command?

In the current development version, actually

myrinforzamf = \single\leftalign \rinforzamf

would likely work fine for that purpose.  In 2.16, you would have to
write

myrinforzaml = \tweak DynamicText #'self-alignment-X #-1 \rinforzamf

In 2.14, it might work when leaving DynamicText off and placing a -
before \tweak, but I am not sure about that.  Perhaps it _does_ need
David's solution.

So in terms of end-user gobbledygook, from 2.14 to 2.16 to current
development there is a definite decrease happening which you are
choosing to cut yourself off from.

 It's not the examples in the documentation, or at least, I understand
 all of the documentation except for the introduction to scheme, which
 is fine for me, since I don't use scheme.

That should make you all that much happier for the developments that
make it more and more possible to let _others_ meddle with Scheme and
let you reap the results, including those (like \single and the more
powerful forms of \tweak) that already made it into LilyPond.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Janek Warchoł]

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:07 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
 At any rate, in LilyPond 2.16 you _can_ write the above as
 rinforzamf =
 #(make-dynamic-script
   #{ \markup \line { \left-align \normal-text \whiteout \italic rinforza
  \hspace #0
  \whiteout \dynamic mf }
   #})

 [..]
 In the current development version, actually

 myrinforzamf = \single\leftalign \rinforzamf

 would likely work fine for that purpose.

i like these simplifications :)
Janek

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Werner LEMBERG]

 Maybe examples can be extended and/or reduced to make them easier
 to comprehend.

 It's not the examples in the documentation, or at least, I
 understand all of the documentation except for the introduction to
 scheme, which is fine for me, since I don't use scheme.

Well, as a matter of fact, LilyPond uses Scheme to extend its
functionality.  This won't change.  Ignoring this part is the same as
refusing to learn, say, Japanese Kanji characters if you already know
the Hiragana and Katakana syllable scripts.  Without Kanji you are
able to read children's books and many Manga cartoons, but you won't
be able to read normal Japanese newspapers or books.  If you are
satisfied with children literature then everything's fine.  Otherwise,
you have to stretch your knowledge.

In other words, an a-priori refusal of Scheme isn't helpful if you
want to explore the capabilities of LilyPond.  So I ask again: What
exactly are the difficulties you have encountered?  What concepts are
badly explained, what examples are `greek' to you, and why?  Simply
skipping the Scheme code and asking for a non-Scheme solution isn't
helpful either.


Werner

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Kastrup]

Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:

 Maybe examples can be extended and/or reduced to make them easier
 to comprehend.

 It's not the examples in the documentation, or at least, I
 understand all of the documentation except for the introduction to
 scheme, which is fine for me, since I don't use scheme.

 Well, as a matter of fact, LilyPond uses Scheme to extend its
 functionality.  This won't change.

 Ignoring this part is the same as refusing to learn, say, Japanese
 Kanji characters if you already know the Hiragana and Katakana
 syllable scripts.  Without Kanji you are able to read children's books
 and many Manga cartoons, but you won't be able to read normal Japanese
 newspapers or books.  If you are satisfied with children literature
 then everything's fine.  Otherwise, you have to stretch your
 knowledge.

I don't think this is an accurate comparison.  LilyPond is supposed to
be useful without having to extend it.

 In other words, an a-priori refusal of Scheme isn't helpful if you
 want to explore the capabilities of LilyPond.

If you want to _extend_ them.  LilyPond is nowhere near the state where
every imaginable music typesetting task is available as a turnkey
solution.  But that does not mean having to use Scheme is an ideal or a
goal for LilyPond.

Many houseowners get along without doing masonry themselves.

 So I ask again: What exactly are the difficulties you have
 encountered?  What concepts are badly explained, what examples are
 `greek' to you, and why?  Simply skipping the Scheme code and asking
 for a non-Scheme solution isn't helpful either.

Our Scheme introductions are not really much more than a cursory
introduction.  Explaining the concepts of Scheme exhaustively would be
beyond the LilyPond manuals.

Its purpose is mostly getting people's feet wet enough that they don't
see the point in putting their socks back on.

It would seem that we need to do a bit more splashing before this works
reliably.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Janek Warchoł]

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 2:13 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
 LilyPond is supposed to
 be useful without having to extend it.

 In other words, an a-priori refusal of Scheme isn't helpful if you
 want to explore the capabilities of LilyPond.

 If you want to _extend_ them.  LilyPond is nowhere near the state where
 every imaginable music typesetting task is available as a turnkey
 solution.  But that does not mean having to use Scheme is an ideal or a
 goal for LilyPond.

 Many houseowners get along without doing masonry themselves.

+1

 Our Scheme introductions are not really much more than a cursory
 introduction.  Explaining the concepts of Scheme exhaustively would be
 beyond the LilyPond manuals.

 Its purpose is mostly getting people's feet wet enough that they don't
 see the point in putting their socks back on.

 It would seem that we need to do a bit more splashing before this works
 reliably.

:)

cheers,
Janek

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

A documentation suggestion, was: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[james]

 Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
 
 So I ask again: What exactly are the difficulties you have
 encountered?  What concepts are badly explained, what examples are
 `greek' to you, and why?  Simply skipping the Scheme code and asking
 for a non-Scheme solution isn't helpful either.

Perhaps there is a much simpler solution. Notation reference, 1.3.1 is where I 
got the example which I have been using since at least 2.12, because  centering 
such a new dynamic is probably rarer than having it left-aligned, I think it 
would be useful to note that there's an easy way of doing this. A minor change 
from the example in the documentation.
\version 2.14.0 

rinforzaF = #(make-dynamic-script
(markup #:normal-text rinforza
#:dynamic f))
tweekRinforzaF = \tweak DynamicText #'self-alignment-X #-1 #(make-dynamic-script
   (markup #:normal-text rinforza
   #:dynamic f))
\relative c' { f16 f f f f f f f f\rinforzaF f f f f f f f }

\relative c' { f16 f f f f f f f f\tweekRinforzaF f f f f f f f }

I think the extension that happen to lilypond are a good thing, I have no 
problem with them. I don't have to understand all of them. I know that when 
these extensions happen, updating the documentation becomes an extremely 
arduous task. From a certain point of view, it's not really feasible to update 
everything in the documentation that's easier because of something that's 
changed in lilypond. I think, however, this would be a great place to make a 
change that certainly would have helped me.


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

Re: A documentation suggestion, was: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Kastrup]

james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com writes:

 Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
 
 So I ask again: What exactly are the difficulties you have
 encountered?  What concepts are badly explained, what examples are
 `greek' to you, and why?  Simply skipping the Scheme code and asking
 for a non-Scheme solution isn't helpful either.

 Perhaps there is a much simpler solution. Notation reference, 1.3.1 is
 where I got the example which I have been using since at least 2.12,
 because centering such a new dynamic is probably rarer than having it
 left-aligned, I think it would be useful to note that there's an easy
 way of doing this. A minor change from the example in the
 documentation.  \version 2.14.0

 rinforzaF = #(make-dynamic-script
 (markup #:normal-text rinforza
 #:dynamic f))
 tweekRinforzaF = \tweak DynamicText #'self-alignment-X #-1

[...]

That name is rather awful.  It would also be more useful to have
rinforza =
#(define-event-function (parser location text ev)
((markup? rinforza) ly:event?)
   (make-dynamic-script #{ \markup { \normal-text #text
   \dynamic #(ly:music-property ev 'text) }
#}))

And then you can use \rinforza\f or \rinforza\ff or
\rinforza sempre \ff

Admittedly, this last usage is not really compatible with the spirit of
a macro named \rinforza, so the optional argument idea might be
overdoing it.

 I think the extension that happen to lilypond are a good thing, I have
 no problem with them. I don't have to understand all of them.

Well, I was getting defensive here partly because I confused you with
Jay.  It is hard keeping track of everybody involved in the discussions.

 I know that when these extensions happen, updating the documentation
 becomes an extremely arduous task. From a certain point of view, it's
 not really feasible to update everything in the documentation that's
 easier because of something that's changed in lilypond. I think,
 however, this would be a great place to make a change that certainly
 would have helped me.

Yes.  Part of the problem is that writing documentation from scratch is
a _lot_ of work, so people tend to change and extend preexisting
documentation if at all.  But of course, the existing documentation has
been designed and modeled around the capabilities and restrictions
existing at the time of its writing.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Joram Berger]

26.10.2012 00:52, David Kastrup:
 … 2.17.6 will make a lot of #'xxx and #'(xxx yyy) unnecessary.
 … Something like Score.Accidental, previously an
 isolated LilyPond syntax element, now has a straightforward and direct
 correspondence to Scheme data structures.
 
 Being able to map LilyPond straightforward to Scheme and back also helps
 with the inner consistency und understanding of the LilyPond language on
 its own.

Wow. I followed the discussions about this new implementation a little
bit. And if I understand it right, it's something I have dreamed of for
quite some time. I will be happy to try and use it, as soon it's in a
new version.
Thanks a lot!

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Joram Berger]

Am 27.10.2012 14:13, schrieb David Kastrup:
 Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
 Well, as a matter of fact, LilyPond uses Scheme to extend its
 functionality.  This won't change.
It is a very unintuitive language to me. But I fear I have to live with
it, when dealing with LilyPond in a bit more detail.

 I don't think this is an accurate comparison.  LilyPond is supposed to
 be useful without having to extend it.
I appreciate very much that this works very well (using LilyPond without
extending it) and it's a great achievement in itself.

 If you want to _extend_ them.  LilyPond is nowhere near the state where
 every imaginable music typesetting task is available as a turnkey
 solution.  But that does not mean having to use Scheme is an ideal or a
 goal for LilyPond.
 
 Many houseowners get along without doing masonry themselves.
+1

As many people said before: It's great and I hope this will stay a goal
of the LilyPond development, that you can use it without scheme, and
even without tweaking too much for most of the cases.
For power users, it is great that you can so much magic and extend
LilyPond with scheme functions (which also helps other users with a
reduced understanding like me, who can just copy-paste such code from
the LSR, for example).

Cheers,
Joram

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

Re:Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Kevin Patrick Barry]

Dear LilyPond users,

I have found the recent debate about the difficulty of using LilyPond
interesting and would like to offer my experience, as someone who has
been using it for about six months.  I apologise if this is a bit
long.

For the most part I use LilyPond to do musical examples, for theory
classes I teach at University, and for my forthcoming thesis.  In
general I have been able to figure out solutions to most problems I
encounter, inspite of the fact that LilyPond is not very kind when you
try to reduce lots of music to two staves and then cover it with
annotations so someone else can understand it.  Finale and Sibelius
are much easier for editorial stuff than LilyPond, but they don't look
nearly as good, so I'm determined to persevere.

In this past week I was asked to do the typesetting for a forthcoming
book which will be about 40% musical examples (I have done typesetting
for books before, in Finale, with which I am fairly proficient).
Naturally this was an opportunity to sell LilyPond (especially since
Finale or Sibelius scores look worse and worse as they get smaller).
I sent the editor a link to the LilyPond 'essay' and she was sold
enough to consider it even though it may take more time.  As a test I
did one full page of examples in LilyPond (of which there will be
maybe 90 in total in the book), and it was inhumanly difficult.
Having to produce another (dead) author's idiosyncrasies without
licence to compromise is hard in any software, but I have to say it
was much tougher in LilyPond than Finale, where one can simply drag
things around.  The result is that the editor is, at the time of
writing, reconsidering Finale (which is a shame - in a book with so
much music LilyPond would make a real positive difference, but the
battle is not lost yet).

Sibelius is the software taught in the University here, but the recent
shenanigans involving Avid, and the rise in the culture of BYOD and
open source, have put the staff off continuing with it.  I have some
influence, and was asked about LilyPond, but I could not recommend it
(my view was to wait for MuseScore 2.0), mainly since it is not
well-suited to either of the two most common activities for this
software by students: doing musical examples for essays or other
homework, and composing (hitting a play button, changing a note you
don't like and hitting play again; hearing sampled instruments without
having to export to other software etc.).  I don't know what to say
about these things - the former can be helped, but perhaps not the
latter.

Either way, LilyPond's capacity to change is surely not something to
be negative about.  And the best way to effect it is probably through
this mailing list.  Perhaps I am a niche user who's interests will not
make their way into the programme.  The saving grace for me will be
the mailing list.  In the last two days I asked two questions; one had
two answers within a matter of two hours, and the other was answered
in an astonishing 17 minutes (my thanks to David and Harm) - try
getting that kind of helpfulness from a company who's product you have
bought!  You don't have to be one of the power users to benefit.

Kevin

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Francisco Vila]

2012/10/25 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
 Jay Hamilton i...@soundand.com writes:

 Janek-
 I'm not going to do that. Here's a few reasons why.

 Well, obviously I am rather partial here, but I quite disagree with your
 assessment here.  What you are witnessing on the user list is the
 emergence of power users, a class of users narrowing the gap between
 users and core developers.  Yes, they juggle with complex material.  But
 that does not mean that things have actually become more complex, but
 rather that they previously would have had to drop the ball.

I strongly agree.

 For the normal user, things have not changed all that much.  Lots of
 typesetting tasks are now done better without user intervention.  The
 documentation is improving quite a bit.  Many operations are becoming
 more streamlined and logical.  Many weird exceptions are gradually
 disappearing, and a lot of things that previously required deep meddling
 with Scheme programming have become much simpler and don't require
 leaving LilyPond itself all that much.

Again, I strongly agree.

 So in the course of if it's not broken don't fix it. I'm not going to
 upgrade to the new version. I'm certain that this will render me
 without help down the road (like for this issue about bar numbers) but
 the number of things I see from the lily user group that interest and
 concern them/you lately are rarely anything I have use for or interest
 in using.

But the contents of the lily user group is made by users like you, and
you as a member have always something to say and participate, and the
level of complexity depends on what users ask and other users answer.
There is not a pre-set level that excludes anybody not interested in
some specific issues. Rather, whatever issues are you interested in,
is what makes the traffic of the users list, not the other way.
-- 
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[james]

On Oct 25, 2012, at 11:15 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
 …
  What you are witnessing on the user list is the
 emergence of power users, a class of users narrowing the gap between
 users and core developers.  Yes, they juggle with complex material.  But
 that does not mean that things have actually become more complex, 
 .…

This. This is exactly why I read the lists far less and respond far less. I 
have no clue when it comes to scheme. Most of the responses involve functions 
or macros or whatever they're called, but generally, when something starts off 
with #(, I checkout mentally because whatever follows will take me at least a 
half an hour (if at all) to understand what I, in my less sophisticated 
understanding of lilypond would have done with \set or \override. In fact, I 
make very few changes to lilypond (one of its advantages), and when I see 
something like #(, I just search the documentation a little bit harder for the 
\set or \override that will most likely have the same effect. Heck, \tweak 
usually too advanced for me to understand.



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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[james]

On Oct 26, 2012, at 7:11 PM, David Kastrup wrote:

 james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com writes:
 
 On Oct 25, 2012, at 11:15 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
 …
 What you are witnessing on the user list is the
 emergence of power users, a class of users narrowing the gap between
 users and core developers.  Yes, they juggle with complex material.  But
 that does not mean that things have actually become more complex, 
 .…
 
 This. This is exactly why I read the lists far less and respond far
 less. I have no clue when it comes to scheme.
 
 So you would prefer it if people got stuck already at a level you are
 more comfortable with?

I'm sorry that you inferred that from what I said. No. I am perfectly fine with 
everybody using lilypond at the level they are comfortable with.
 
 Most of the responses involve functions or macros or whatever they're
 called, but generally, when something starts off with #(, I checkout
 mentally because whatever follows will take me at least a half an hour
 (if at all) to understand what I, in my less sophisticated
 understanding of lilypond would have done with \set or \override.
 
 Well, then you should rather applaud the trend to
 
 a) make it possible for power users to write functions and user
 interfaces encapsulating more complex functionality, stuff you can then
 treat and employ as black boxes solving a task for you while having the
 appearance of something that LilyPond can do natively.

And I do. I just don't understand them, and when I ask a question, I frequently 
don't understand the answer.

 
 b) make it possible to check out of Scheme again and back into LilyPond
 with #{ ... #} for a lot of things.

I guess so. I don't really know what this means. And that's okay. I don't have 
to understand all of these functions. I can use lilypond at my level, and 
others can use it at theirs.
 
 LilyPond is gaining wings.  Nobody forces you to flap them: sitting
 stationary remains quite a valid option.  You are feeling left out; but
 the truth is that you can also just hitch a ride wherever other people
 are taking her.

My main issue is that when I don't understand how to do something, while there 
might be a way to do it that I could understand, because the power users are 
the ones that more often than not respond, I'm left with an answer that my 
solve my immediate problem, but in a way that I don't understand, and can't 
adapt to future problems. Unfortunately, there's no real solution to the 
problem other than saying, and please limit the amount of scheme in an answer, 
because I don't understand it.
I re-read the learning manual when a major stable version is released, just to 
become familiar with any major changes. I know how to search the notation 
reference for the contexts or engravers I might want to modify, and what 
modifications I can make to them, because these kinds of changes are very 
clearly explained in the learning manual. The scheme tweaks, however, require a 
background knowledge that I just don't have, and really have no desire to gain.
Again, I'm perfectly fine with people being able to do the things in scheme 
that they can do, and I'll muddle along with the little bit of programming I've 
learned from the learning manual. My point, however, is that this list is 
becoming increasingly a place for power users to exchange power examples, 
and me and my little \override and \set and \revert and all but forgotten.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Werner LEMBERG]

 I re-read the learning manual when a major stable version is
 released, just to become familiar with any major changes. I know how
 to search the notation reference for the contexts or engravers I
 might want to modify, and what modifications I can make to them,
 because these kinds of changes are very clearly explained in the
 learning manual. The scheme tweaks, however, require a background
 knowledge that I just don't have, and really have no desire to gain.

It would be very helpful to us if you can find some time to *exactly*
point out what background knowledge you are missing.  While LilyPond
can't give a detailed introduction into Scheme, the example code is
intended to be understandable in most cases even by people who don't
have experience with Scheme.

Maybe examples can be extended and/or reduced to make them easier to
comprehend.


Werner

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Nalesnik]

Hi James,

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:08 PM, james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com wrote:


 My main issue is that when I don't understand how to do something, while 
 there might be a way to do it that I could understand, because the power 
 users are the ones that more often than not respond, I'm left with an answer 
 that my solve my immediate problem, but in a way that I don't understand, and 
 can't adapt to future problems. Unfortunately, there's no real solution to 
 the problem other than saying, and please limit the amount of scheme in an 
 answer, because I don't understand it.

OK, I guess I qualify as one of the power users who puts a bit of
Scheme on the lists.  There are questions that can be answered with a
simple do this basic override and look at this reference for more
info.  If there are questions like this, that's the kind of answer I
give (though I am usually beaten to it!)

However, there are often questions that can't be answered in any way
but to delve into Scheme.  As recently, for example, when a question
was posed about using \draw-line to make a dashed line instead of a
solid one.  AFAIK, there's no simple way to do it which you can look
up in one of the manuals.  The only way to answer the poster's
question was to rewrite Lily's Scheme code for \draw-line into Scheme
code for a new command \draw-dashed-line, which Harm and I did.  Maybe
someday Lily will be enhanced so that no one need see the gears, but
in the meantime, that's the stopgap solution these questions will
receive.  (Unless they are to remain unanswered, that is.)

Lately, I have noticed that there are fewer basic questions being
asked.  I do hope that that's not through some sort of intimidation,
over a misconception over what this forum is about.  Perhaps users are
finding their answers more reliably in the manuals, and it is only
when they can't find them that they turn to the lists--I don't know.

-David

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Kastrup]

David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com writes:

 However, there are often questions that can't be answered in any way
 but to delve into Scheme.  As recently, for example, when a question
 was posed about using \draw-line to make a dashed line instead of a
 solid one.  AFAIK, there's no simple way to do it which you can look
 up in one of the manuals.  The only way to answer the poster's
 question was to rewrite Lily's Scheme code for \draw-line into Scheme
 code for a new command \draw-dashed-line, which Harm and I did.  Maybe
 someday Lily will be enhanced so that no one need see the gears, but
 in the meantime, that's the stopgap solution these questions will
 receive.  (Unless they are to remain unanswered, that is.)

Of course, there is a danger that solutions like that are floated on the
lists and don't actually make it into LilyPond as readily available
functionality.

-- 
David Kastrup


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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Nalesnik]

David,

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 2:42 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
 David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com writes:

 However, there are often questions that can't be answered in any way
 but to delve into Scheme.  As recently, for example, when a question
 was posed about using \draw-line to make a dashed line instead of a
 solid one.  AFAIK, there's no simple way to do it which you can look
 up in one of the manuals.  The only way to answer the poster's
 question was to rewrite Lily's Scheme code for \draw-line into Scheme
 code for a new command \draw-dashed-line, which Harm and I did.  Maybe
 someday Lily will be enhanced so that no one need see the gears, but
 in the meantime, that's the stopgap solution these questions will
 receive.  (Unless they are to remain unanswered, that is.)

 Of course, there is a danger that solutions like that are floated on the
 lists and don't actually make it into LilyPond as readily available
 functionality.


Certainly.  It happens that a number of these solutions are one-offs
for unusual requests, but sometimes there's a general utility.  If the
answer is on the lists, it's easy just to refer the poster to that
thread.  Eventually, of course, solutions like these are lost for
good.  (For example, there's an email from Mike Solomon I distantly
remember detailing how something might be centered between staves; I'd
like to read it again, but I can't find it in the archives any more.)
Now that I'm getting more familiar with the development tools, I'm
happy to work on adding useful things.  What qualifies as bloat I'm
not so sure.

-David

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Thomas Morley]

2012/10/26 David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com:
 David,

 On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 2:42 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
 David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com writes:

 However, there are often questions that can't be answered in any way
 but to delve into Scheme.  As recently, for example, when a question
 was posed about using \draw-line to make a dashed line instead of a
 solid one.  AFAIK, there's no simple way to do it which you can look
 up in one of the manuals.  The only way to answer the poster's
 question was to rewrite Lily's Scheme code for \draw-line into Scheme
 code for a new command \draw-dashed-line, which Harm and I did.  Maybe
 someday Lily will be enhanced so that no one need see the gears, but
 in the meantime, that's the stopgap solution these questions will
 receive.  (Unless they are to remain unanswered, that is.)

 Of course, there is a danger that solutions like that are floated on the
 lists and don't actually make it into LilyPond as readily available
 functionality.


 Certainly.  It happens that a number of these solutions are one-offs
 for unusual requests, but sometimes there's a general utility.  If the
 answer is on the lists, it's easy just to refer the poster to that
 thread.  Eventually, of course, solutions like these are lost for
 good.

Hi David (N),

I think the draw-dashed-line-command is worth putting into the source.
If you agree, I will turn it into a patch the next days.

 (For example, there's an email from Mike Solomon I distantly
 remember detailing how something might be centered between staves; I'd
 like to read it again, but I can't find it in the archives any more.)

Do you think of:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Best-way-to-put-a-system-brace-between-2-staves-td56705.html#a56707
?

Regards,
  Harm

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Nalesnik]

Harm,

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Thomas Morley
thomasmorle...@googlemail.com wrote:

[...]

 Hi David (N),

 I think the draw-dashed-line-command is worth putting into the source.
 If you agree, I will turn it into a patch the next days.

Unbelievable.  You must have sent this when I was writing the same
thing in the answer to the other thread :)


 (For example, there's an email from Mike Solomon I distantly
 remember detailing how something might be centered between staves; I'd
 like to read it again, but I can't find it in the archives any more.)

 Do you think of:
 http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Best-way-to-put-a-system-brace-between-2-staves-td56705.html#a56707
 ?


Yes!  I had been looking and looking lately.  Thanks so much!

-David
 Regards,
   Harm

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Thomas Morley]

2012/10/26 David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com:
 Hi James,

 On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:08 PM, james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com wrote:


 My main issue is that when I don't understand how to do something, while 
 there might be a way to do it that I could understand, because the power 
 users are the ones that more often than not respond, I'm left with an 
 answer that my solve my immediate problem, but in a way that I don't 
 understand, and can't adapt to future problems. Unfortunately, there's no 
 real solution to the problem other than saying, and please limit the amount 
 of scheme in an answer, because I don't understand it.

 OK, I guess I qualify as one of the power users who puts a bit of
 Scheme on the lists.  There are questions that can be answered with a
 simple do this basic override and look at this reference for more
 info.  If there are questions like this, that's the kind of answer I
 give (though I am usually beaten to it!)

 However, there are often questions that can't be answered in any way
 but to delve into Scheme.  As recently, for example, when a question
 was posed about using \draw-line to make a dashed line instead of a
 solid one.  AFAIK, there's no simple way to do it which you can look
 up in one of the manuals.  The only way to answer the poster's
 question was to rewrite Lily's Scheme code for \draw-line into Scheme
 code for a new command \draw-dashed-line, which Harm and I did.

Well, my first thought was to demonstrate how to do it using postscript.
But the disadvantage would be that the user has to know (or learn) to
use postscript-commands.


 Maybe
 someday Lily will be enhanced so that no one need see the gears, but
 in the meantime, that's the stopgap solution these questions will
 receive.  (Unless they are to remain unanswered, that is.)

 Lately, I have noticed that there are fewer basic questions being
 asked.  I do hope that that's not through some sort of intimidation,
 over a misconception over what this forum is about.

I think some intimidation could be present, but how to do it different?

Not answering?

Or (back to the draw-dashed-line) demonstrating how to do it with:
drawing a small line
some padding
drawing a small line with appropriate offset
some padding
drawing a small line with appropriate offset
some padding
drawing a small line with appropriate offset
...
??
All needed commands are default-commands!

This would be a work Sisyphus would refuse to do.



Answering user-questions (with some scheme where necessary) is the
sort of work I _do_ like and I'm not that bad in doing so (at least I
hope so).

Well, I could switch more on the developer-corner, doing more
review-work, as far as scheme is concerned (would help David (K),
too), but I feel I would be less effective there, at least currently.

 Perhaps users are
 finding their answers more reliably in the manuals, and it is only
 when they can't find them that they turn to the lists--I don't know.

 -David

Regards,
  Harm

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Kastrup]

Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@googlemail.com writes:

 I think some intimidation could be present, but how to do it different?

 Not answering?

 Or (back to the draw-dashed-line) demonstrating how to do it with:
 drawing a small line
 some padding
 drawing a small line with appropriate offset
 some padding
 drawing a small line with appropriate offset
 some padding
 drawing a small line with appropriate offset
 ...
 ??
 All needed commands are default-commands!

 This would be a work Sisyphus would refuse to do.

Just use the \pattern markup command instead.

-- 
David Kastrup


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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Jay Hamilton]

Janek-
I'm not going to do that.  Here's a few reasons why.
I've been using lilypond since some kind of 1 version.  Some of the
stable versions have been baby steps and easy to accommodate and
understand.  Many many of the changes that have been taking place in V2
have not been like that.  It took me a year to figure out all the changes
during the last two stable  versions.  And now there is a new one and just
looking at the templates I realize that I have no idea what is going on and
that the program has now reached a level of complexity that defeats my
purposes- to produce a good looking, in a quick way, sheet of music for
students and professional musicians.

So in the course of if it's not broken don't fix it.  I'm not going to
upgrade to the new version.  I'm certain that this will render me without
help down the road (like for this issue about bar numbers)  but the number
of things I see from the lily user group that interest and concern them/you
lately are rarely anything I have use for or interest in using.

I'm sorry, perhaps lily is becoming a better program but it's not becoming
a better piece of software from this user's perspective.  And hasn't been
in the last few iterations, it's just changed.
Jay



On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hi,

 On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:16 PM,  i...@soundand.com wrote:
  Hello
 
  using version 2.14.1 [...]

 please try latest stable version (2.16.0).

 best,
 Janek




-- 
Jay Hamilton Sound and Silence www.soundand.com 206-328-7694
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Kastrup]

Jay Hamilton i...@soundand.com writes:

 Janek-
 I'm not going to do that. Here's a few reasons why.
 I've been using lilypond since some kind of 1 version. Some of the
 stable versions have been baby steps and easy to accommodate and
 understand. Many many of the changes that have been taking place in V2
 have not been like that. It took me a year to figure out all the
 changes during the last two stable versions. And now there is a new
 one and just looking at the templates I realize that I have no idea
 what is going on and that the program has now reached a level of
 complexity that defeats my purposes- to produce a good looking, in a
 quick way, sheet of music for students and professional musicians.

Well, obviously I am rather partial here, but I quite disagree with your
assessment here.  What you are witnessing on the user list is the
emergence of power users, a class of users narrowing the gap between
users and core developers.  Yes, they juggle with complex material.  But
that does not mean that things have actually become more complex, but
rather that they previously would have had to drop the ball.

For the normal user, things have not changed all that much.  Lots of
typesetting tasks are now done better without user intervention.  The
documentation is improving quite a bit.  Many operations are becoming
more streamlined and logical.  Many weird exceptions are gradually
disappearing, and a lot of things that previously required deep meddling
with Scheme programming have become much simpler and don't require
leaving LilyPond itself all that much.

Check out
URL:http://news.lilynet.net/?The-LilyPond-Report-23lang=en#feature_story_prelude_1_in_scheme
and compare the final version of input I am using here with the version
from Nicolas Sceaux (referenced in the article) about five years
earlier.  Things have become much, much simpler to do.

Now this might still not be the level you are comfortable with, but it
is a level that quite a few readers on the user lists actually can work
with, and consequently you can get help and suggestions here for solving
your problems.

 So in the course of if it's not broken don't fix it. I'm not going to
 upgrade to the new version. I'm certain that this will render me
 without help down the road (like for this issue about bar numbers) but
 the number of things I see from the lily user group that interest and
 concern them/you lately are rarely anything I have use for or interest
 in using.

 I'm sorry, perhaps lily is becoming a better program but it's not
 becoming a better piece of software from this user's perspective. And
 hasn't been in the last few iterations, it's just changed.

The typesetting has improved much (lots of collision and spacing issues
have been tackled), and _lots_ of documents will just convert cleanly
with convert-ly to the rather few syntax changes.  So even if you don't
want to make use of any new features or possibilities, upgrading is
likely to improve your existing scores.

-- 
David Kastrup


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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Thomas Morley]

 if you don't
 want to make use of any new features or possibilities, upgrading is
 likely to improve your existing scores.

+1

 --
 David Kastrup


Best,
  Harm

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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[David Kastrup]

Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@googlemail.com writes:

 With 2.16.0 you could use:

 \tweak Accidental #'font-size #-2

The way it looks, with 2.17.6 you will likely have to write

\tweak Accidental.font-size #-2

indeed, an incompatible syntax change.  convert-ly will cover it,
though.  2.17.6 will make a lot of #'xxx and #'(xxx yyy) unnecessary.
Very few commands, like the special tweak form, will have a non-upwards
compatible (though simpler) syntax change.  For most commands, the forms
are interchangeable.  Something like Score.Accidental, previously an
isolated LilyPond syntax element, now has a straightforward and direct
correspondence to Scheme data structures.

Being able to map LilyPond straightforward to Scheme and back also helps
with the inner consistency und understanding of the LilyPond language on
its own.

-- 
David Kastrup


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

Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Eluze]

Am 26.10.2012 00:52, schrieb David Kastrup:

Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@googlemail.com writes:


With 2.16.0 you could use:

\tweak Accidental #'font-size #-2

The way it looks, with 2.17.6 you will likely have to write

\tweak Accidental.font-size #-2

indeed, an incompatible syntax change.  convert-ly will cover it,
though.  2.17.6 will make a lot of #'xxx and #'(xxx yyy) unnecessary.
Very few commands, like the special tweak form, will have a non-upwards
compatible (though simpler) syntax change.  For most commands, the forms
are interchangeable.  Something like Score.Accidental, previously an
isolated LilyPond syntax element, now has a straightforward and direct
correspondence to Scheme data structures.

Being able to map LilyPond straightforward to Scheme and back also helps
with the inner consistency und understanding of the LilyPond language on
its own.



that's very promising - I'm looking forward!
Eluze

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

upgrading

[Gerard McConnell]

Hi, 
Perhaps a stupid question -  is there any reason NOT to

upgrade from 2.12.x  to 2.13.7?
Thanks,
Gerard


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: upgrading

[Francisco Vila]

2009/11/11 Gerard McConnell gerry...@indigo.ie:
 Hi, Perhaps a stupid question -  is there any reason NOT to
 upgrade from 2.12.x  to 2.13.7?

Possibly. 2.13.7 could have changes in syntax, or experimental
features. It worths it if you want to help testing it.
-- 
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
www.paconet.org
www.csmbadajoz.com


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: upgrading

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Am Mittwoch, 11. November 2009 12:13:49 schrieb Gerard McConnell:
 Hi,
 Perhaps a stupid question -  is there any reason NOT to
 upgrade from 2.12.x  to 2.13.7?

If you are adjusting the vertical layout (staff spacing, padding etc.), then 
things will be completely different in 2.13.7, and there is no convert-ly rule 
(yet???).

Cheers,
Reinhold

- -- 
- --
Reinhold Kainhofer, reinh...@kainhofer.com, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial  Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFK+p+STqjEwhXvPN0RApgnAJ9afg8rE7i6/lQTnPttMDQ8g3P2GgCgjmSr
JnBwCzKrW8+dXFUWP7THtSM=
=V3aU
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: upgrading

[James E. Bailey]

On 11.11.2009, at 12:13, Gerard McConnell wrote:


Hi, Perhaps a stupid question -  is there any reason NOT to
upgrade from 2.12.x  to 2.13.7?
Thanks,
Gerard



I tend to work from the if it ain't broke, don't fix it principle.  
So, unless there's something fundamentally broken that you absolutely  
cannot work without (like custom key signatures) that's fixed in 2.13  
and not in 2.12, I would wait.


James E. Bailey



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

PDF problem after upgrading to Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala) with LilyPond 2.12.2

[Ralph Palmer]

Hi -

I'm running LilyPond 2.12.2 under Ubuntu 9.10. I have a .ly file I've been
writing/editing for a while using 2.12.2 under Ubuntu 9.9 (I think - Jaunty
Jackalope). I upgraded yesterday, and found I needed to reinstall LilyPond.
The package that came with Ubuntu 9.10 was, if fact, 2.12.2, so I loaded it
with no problem. I ran convert-ly on everything in sight. Now, when I run an
extremely short (one measure) .ly file, it seems to work okay. However, when
I run LilyPond on the file I've been working on, the PDF does not refresh.
Here's the error I get:

Layout output to `vla_pos_etudes_1.ps'...
Converting to
`./vla_pos_etudes_1.pdf'.../usr/local/lilypond/usr/share/lilypond/current/scm/backend-library.scm:24:15:
In procedure system in expression (system silenced):
/usr/local/lilypond/usr/share/lilypond/current/scm/backend-library.scm:24:15:
Cannot allocate memory
rpal...@rlaptop:~/SheetMusic/ly/Classical/vla/etudes/positions_1$

Anyone else 1) having this problem; and/or 2) have any idea what the problem
is or how to fix it?

I appreciate your time and attention,

Ralph

-- 
Ralph Palmer
Montague City, MA
USA
palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Upgrading to a newer version of lilypond

[chip]

Ok, so after all is said and done in the other thread I started, here 
goes another one - is there a proper upgrade path or do I just download 
and extract the latest version over the top of the existing version? The 
Application Usage document only mentions 'upgrade' in relationship to 
convert-ly, not upgrading lilypond. Oh, I am using lilypond on a linux 
(ubuntu) box.

Thanks
--
Chip


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading to a newer version of lilypond

[Jonathan Kulp]

If you got it via the Synaptic Package Manager or Add/Remove Programs, 
then remove the old version the same way before trying to install the 
new one.


Jon

chip wrote:
Ok, so after all is said and done in the other thread I started, here 
goes another one - is there a proper upgrade path or do I just download 
and extract the latest version over the top of the existing version? The 
Application Usage document only mentions 'upgrade' in relationship to 
convert-ly, not upgrading lilypond. Oh, I am using lilypond on a linux 
(ubuntu) box.

Thanks
--
Chip


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



--
Jonathan Kulp
http://www.jonathankulp.com


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading to a newer version of lilypond

[chip]

Jonathan Kulp wrote:
If you got it via the Synaptic Package Manager or Add/Remove Programs, 
then remove the old version the same way before trying to install the 
new one.


Jon

Thanks Jon, got the 'older' version uninstalled the and new version 
installed and made a new entry to my path so it will run from the 
command line.

--
chip


chip wrote:
Ok, so after all is said and done in the other thread I started, here 
goes another one - is there a proper upgrade path or do I just 
download and extract the latest version over the top of the existing 
version? The Application Usage document only mentions 'upgrade' in 
relationship to convert-ly, not upgrading lilypond. Oh, I am using 
lilypond on a linux (ubuntu) box.

Thanks
--
Chip


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user







___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading to a newer version of lilypond

[Francisco Vila]

2008/11/16 chip [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Thanks Jon, got the 'older' version uninstalled the and new version
 installed and made a new entry to my path so it will run from the command
 line.

I recommend new Linux users to install as root, being the reason that
it is fully automatic. As normal user, on the other hand, you have to
fiddle with the PATH and to install it per user.
-- 
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
http://www.paconet.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Problem with lilypond-book after upgrading to 2.11.43-2

[René Brandenburger]

Hi list,

after upgrading from 2.11.35 to 2.11.43-2, my call to lilypond-book does
not work anymore.

I used to call lilypond-book the following way: 

lilypond-book --pdf --include=BookIn --include=. --output=BookOut
SongBook.tex

and it always worked fine, but after the upgrade, I get the following: 

lilypond-book (GNU LilyPond) 2.11.43
lilypond-book: Fehler: Ausgabe würde Eingabedatei überschreiben;
verwenden Sie --output.

thanks in advance for any advice

rene




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

after upgrading problems with lilypond-book

[Wolfgang Mechsner]

After upgrading my Ubuntu Linux I get the following message (lilypond 
2.10.25):


##
lilypond-book (GNU LilyPond) 2.10.25
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File /usr/bin/lilypond-book, line 1879, in module
main ()
  File /usr/bin/lilypond-book, line 1845, in main
chunks = do_file (file)
  File /usr/bin/lilypond-book, line 1675, in do_file
in_handle = open (input_fullname)
IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: ''


Any ideas?

Wolfgang


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading

[Mats Bengtsson]

The latest stable version is 2.8.7. To upgrade, just uninstall your 
current version and
install the new one. Utilities like midi2ly in 2.8.7 should work well on 
Windows XP,
but if you want to use lilypond-book, you should rather try the latest 
development

version 2.9.22 or wait for 2.10 which soon will appear.

  /Mats

Ben wrote:

Hi,
I run Windows XP, and I haven't upgraded since v.2.6.5. Is there n 
easy way to upgrade, or should I wait for 2.10 to come out? I don't 
really stretch LP's capabilities, but I've been unable to use most 
utilities because of a problem in the Python distribution included.

Just Wondering,
--
～Ben （現）


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
  


--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
   Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Upgrading

[Ben]

Hi,
I run Windows XP, and I haven't upgraded since v.2.6.5. Is there n easy
way to upgrade, or should I wait for 2.10 to come out? I don't really
stretch LP's capabilities, but I've been unable to use most utilities
because of a problem in the Python distribution included.
Just Wondering,-- ～Ben （現）
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Again problems after upgrading

[Wolfgang Mechsner]

After upgrading from 2.6.1 to Lilypond 8.1 I get the following error messages 
if I use lilypond-book:
###
dvips -h main.psfonts main.dvi
This is dvips(k) 5.95a Copyright 2005 Radical Eye Software 
(www.radicaleye.com)
' TeX output 2006.04.27:1006' - main.ps
dvips: Font Aybabtu-Regular used in file lily-261687144-1.eps is not in the 
mapping file. 
dvips: Font BitstreamVeraSans-Roman used in file lily-261687144-1.eps is not 
in the mapping file. .
###

This hint doesn't work:  
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2005-11/msg00360.html

Thanks in advance,
Wolfgang
-- 
Wolfgang Mechsner
http://www.wolfgang-mechsner.de
http://wolfsfundstuecke.blog.de
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Upgrading LilyPond on Windows XP

[Tomas Valusek]

Hello,

my current version of LilyPond is 2.8.1-1. I've found a new minor 
upgrade. When I tried to install it, the installer said it found 
previous version of LilyPond and said a had had to uninstall it first. 
Why is it bothering me with it and just doesn't ask: Previous version 
of LilyPond found. It is necessary to uninstall it before proceeding. Do 
you want to uninstall the previous LilyPond version? (Yes/Cancel)?


Tomas Valusek


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Upgrading from 2.6 to 2.8

[Kress, Stephen]

Title: Upgrading from 2.6 to 2.8







Hello, all.

I post this with the hopes that it will prove helpful to someone.

I run on a Gentoo Linux system (thanks to whoever picked up the maintenance for the lilypond ebuild! When will I see 2.8.1, btw?) and ran into a simple issue that took a while to work out.

Back in the 2.6/2.7 days, I had used the package installer for lilypond (the Gentoo ebuild only handled 2.7 and I wasn't ready for that).

When it was time to move to 2.8, I did package remove lilypond which worked fine. I then tried both emerging of 2.8.0 and using the install script for 2.8.1. Both worked fine until I tried a simple lilypond myfile.ly. This produced an error when converting from ps to pdf. The command being used was gs-nox and it was producing a strange error about init.ps or something like that having a version mismatch.

To make a long story short, I needed to do package remove ghostscript (I already had an appropriate version emerged using Gentoo's stuff) before my problem cleared up. Installing lilypond 2.6 with the package installer also installed a version of ghostscript (which turned out not to be compatable with 2.8) along with it and removing lilypond dit not remove ghostscript. I need to check if guile also has the same issue...

So, if you are on Linux and move from 2.6 to 2.8, make sure your ghostscript (and probably guile) installation is up-to-date.

Stephen



2006-04-07, 16:35:48
The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may be privileged and confidential.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your computer.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading from 2.6 to 2.8

[Daniel Johnson]

Here's how to get Lilypond 2.8.1 installed from source in Gentoo... it 
isn't hard.  This includes installing a patched version of Ghostscript 
8.53 (which under Gentoo supports the hl1250 printer driver in addition 
to the standard drivers).


1. make sure PORTDIR_OVERLAY is declared in /etc/make.conf (point it to 
/usr/local/portage)

2. echo media-sound/lilypond ~x86  /etc/portage/package.keywords
3. echo app-text/ghostscript-afpl ~x86  /etc/portage/package.keywords
4. mkdir -p /usr/local/portage/media-sound/lilypond; cd 
/usr/local/portage/media-sound/lilypond
5. cp /usr/portage/media-sound/lilypond/lilypond-2.8.0-r1.ebuild 
./lilypond-2.8.1.ebuild

6. ebuild lilypond-2.8.1.ebuild digest
7. mkdir -p /usr/local/portage/app-text/ghostscript-afpl/files
8. cp /usr/portage/app-text/ghostscript-afpl/files/*.{patch,mak,diff} 
/usr/local/portage/app-text/ghostscript-afpl/files
9. copy ghostscript-8.53-global-glyph-names.patch (attached to this 
email) to /usr/local/portage/app-text/ghostscript-afpl/files
   (this patch prevents ghostscript from creating PDF's that are about 
ten times too large)

10. cd /usr/local/portage/app-text/ghostscript-afpl
11. copy ghostscript-afpl-8.53-r5.ebuild (attached to this email) to 
/usr/local/portage/app-text/ghostscript-afpl

12. ebuild ghostscript-afpl-8.53-r5.ebuild digest
13. if you have ghostscript-esp or ghostscript-gnu installed, uninstall 
them (e.g. emerge -C ghostscript-esp)*

13. emerge --oneshot --ask --verbose =app-text/ghostscript-afpl-8.53-r5
14. emerge --ask --verbose =media-sound/lilypond-2.8.1

If you want to use the 2.9 branch, do the same as above, but using a 
different-version filename for the lilypond ebuild. Also, in your 
Portage overlay, you'll want to copy the guile-1.6.7 ebuild from 
/usr/portage/dev-util/guile to guile-1.8.0 in your $PORTDIR_OVERLAY, 
comment out all the patches in the ebuild, do ebuild guile-1.8.0.ebuild 
digest, and then emerge guile.  There is currently a Gentoo bugzilla 
request for an official guile-1.8.0 ebuild.


The advantage of this system is that you know exactly what software is 
being invoked, since there is only one copy of python, guile, 
ghostscript, etc. on your system.  This makes troubleshooting easier.  
The disadvantage is that you are re-doing what the developers already 
spent plenty of time doing.


--Daniel

P.S. Pango 1.12.x is currently hard-masked in Portage.  If you are not 
running a Gnome system and are willing to do a bit of dirty work, you 
can unmask it and install it (and a host of supporting libraries).  It 
will give you the benefit of being able to take advantage of OpenType 
support for ligatures.


* If you think you may need to revert your ghostscript install, you may 
want to create a binary package before unmerging.  If you have 
gentoolkit installed, you can do the following:

   quickpkg ghostscript-esp
Then if you need to re-emerge that same verion, you can do
   emerge --usepkg ghostscript-esp
and you can thereby skip the compile step.

Kress, Stephen wrote:


Hello, all.

I post this with the hopes that it will prove helpful to someone.

I run on a Gentoo Linux system (thanks to whoever picked up the 
maintenance for the lilypond ebuild! When will I see 2.8.1, btw?) and 
ran into a simple issue that took a while to work out.


Back in the 2.6/2.7 days, I had used the package installer for 
lilypond (the Gentoo ebuild only handled 2.7 and I wasn't ready for that).


When it was time to move to 2.8, I did package remove lilypond which 
worked fine.  I then tried both emerging of 2.8.0 and using the 
install script for 2.8.1.  Both worked fine until I tried a simple 
lilypond myfile.ly.  This produced an error when converting from ps 
to pdf.  The command being used was gs-nox and it was producing a 
strange error about init.ps or something like that having a version 
mismatch.


To make a long story short, I needed to do package remove 
ghostscript (I already had an appropriate version emerged using 
Gentoo's stuff) before my problem cleared up.  Installing lilypond 2.6 
with the package installer also installed a version of ghostscript 
(which turned out not to be compatable with 2.8) along with it and 
removing lilypond dit not remove ghostscript.  I need to check if 
guile also has the same issue...


So, if you are on Linux and move from 2.6 to 2.8, make sure your 
ghostscript (and probably guile) installation is up-to-date.


Stephen



# Copyright 1999-2006 Gentoo Foundation
# Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2
# $Header: 
/var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/app-text/ghostscript-afpl/ghostscript-afpl-8.53-r5.ebuild,v
 1.1 2006/04/04 21:40:00 genstef Exp $

inherit eutils

DESCRIPTION=AFPL Ghostscript
HOMEPAGE=http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/;

CUPS_PV=1.1.23
MY_P=ghostscript-${PV}
PVM=${PV%.[0-9]}
SRC_URI=mirror://sourceforge/ghostscript/${MY_P}.tar.gz
cups? ( mirror://gentoo/cups-${CUPS_PV}-source.tar.bz2 )
cjk? ( 

Re: Upgrading to 2.6 Help

[Mats Bengtsson]

You have already received an answer, but why not take a quick look in
the manual corresponding to your version before sending the question to
the mailing list?

  /Mats

Tim Sawyer wrote:

Thanks!  That now gets me a dvi I can preview.  Unfortunately, it has font 
trouble  - I appear to be missing note heads and the time sig is in the wrong 
font.


If I do a dvipdf volume2.dvi it gives the following output:

dvips: Font PFAEmmentaler-20 used in file lily-109005405-1.eps is not in the 
mapping file.
dvips: Font feta-alphabet20 used in file lily-109005405-1.eps is not in the 
mapping file.
dvips: Font CenturySchL-Roma used in file lily-2037270318-1.eps is not in the 
mapping file.
dvips: Font feta-alphabet13 used in file lily-1821431809-1.eps is not in the 
mapping file.
dvips: Font CenturySchL-Ital used in file lily-1808716927-1.eps is not in the 
mapping file.
dvips: Font PFAEmmentaler-14 used in file lily-1262503095-1.eps is not in the 
mapping file.
dvips: Font PFAEmmentaler-18 used in file lily-340522903-1.eps is not in the 
mapping file.


and the pdf contains the same as the dvi.

This is a self built lilypond 2.6.4 (./configure, make all, make install) on 
gentoo.  

I've always had to set TEXMF on gentoo to get lilypond to work, so I added 
that back in, but it doesn't seem to make a difference.  I'm running:


export datadir=/usr/local/share/lilypond/2.6.4
export TEXMF={$datadir,$(kpsexpand  \$TEXMF)}

mv book.tex volume2.tex
rm -r build
mkdir build
cp volume2.tex ./build
cd build
lilypond-book -V --psfonts -o output volume2.tex
cd output
latex volume2.tex
latex volume2.tex
dvipdf volume2.dvi
xdvi volume2
cp volume2.pdf ../..

The fonts are available in /usr/local/share/lilypond/2.6.4/fonts/type1 etc.

Any ideas what I've missed?

Thanks,

Tim.

On Sunday 13 Nov 2005 21:12, Graham Percival wrote:
 


On 13-Nov-05, at 12:12 PM, Tim Sawyer wrote:
   


! Undefined control sequence.
l.1 \includegraphics
   {lily-109005405-1.eps}
?
 


I believe that in 2.6, you need to add
\usepackage{graphics}

to your lilypond-book file.

Cheers,
- Graham
   




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
 



--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
   Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading to 2.6 Help

[Tim Sawyer]

Excellent, thanks that works!

Tim.

On Monday 14 Nov 2005 01:04, Graham Percival wrote:
 On 13-Nov-05, at 2:16 PM, Tim Sawyer wrote:
  Thanks!  That now gets me a dvi I can preview.  Unfortunately, it has
  font
  trouble  - I appear to be missing note heads and the time sig is in
  the wrong
  font.
 
  If I do a dvipdf volume2.dvi it gives the following output:

 Try this:
 dvips -h $1.psfonts -Ppdf $1.dvi
 ps2pdf $1.ps

 (where $1 is to be replaced by the filename)
 If you want to use dvipdf, you'll have to figure out the command line
 options yourself, I'm afraid.

 - Graham


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Upgrading to 2.6 Help

[Tim Sawyer]

I'm trying to upgrade from 2.0 to 2.6, and I'm having trouble.

This fragment, passed to lilypond-book:

\begin[staffsize=20]{lilypond}
\version 2.6.0
up = { \repeat percent 3 { hh8 hh8  hh8 sn8  hh8 hh8 hh8  hh8 sn8  
hh8  } hh8 hh8  hh8 sn8  hh8 sn8 sn8 sn8 sn8 \bar |. }
down = { \repeat percent 3 { bd4 r4 bd4 r4 } bd4 r4 r2 }
\score
{ \set DrumStaff.drumStyleTable = #drums-style
\context Staff

  \time 4/4
  \clef percussion
  \context Voice = up { \voiceOne \up }
  \context Voice = down { \voiceTwo \down }
  \bar |.

}
\end{lilypond}

gives this error:

volume2.tex:726 (lily-1726549371.ly):33:29: error: syntax error, unexpected 
STRING
up = { \repeat percent 3 {
 hh8 hh8  hh8 sn8  hh8 hh8 hh8  hh8 sn8  
hh8  } hh8 hh8  hh8 sn8  hh8 sn8 sn8 sn8 sn8 \bar |. }
volume2.tex:726 (lily-1726549371.ly):34:31: error: syntax error, unexpected 
STRING
down = { \repeat percent 3 {
   bd4 r4 bd4 r4 } bd4 r4 r2 }
volume2.tex:726 (lily-1726549371.ly):34:47: error: syntax error, unexpected 
STRING
down = { \repeat percent 3 { bd4 r4 bd4 r4 }
   bd4 r4 r2 }
error: already have music in score
error: this is the previous music
error: errors found, ignoring music expression

Anyone any ideas?  convert-ly seems to output it the same as it went in.

ta,

Tim.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading to 2.6 Help

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

Tim Sawyer wrote:

I'm trying to upgrade from 2.0 to 2.6, and I'm having trouble.




Anyone any ideas?  convert-ly seems to output it the same as it went in.


Check out the manual section on drum notation. There have been some 
syntax changes.


--
 Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading to 2.6 Help

[Tim Sawyer]

Cheers for that.

Next problem - my music now goes through lilypond book successfully, but I 
don't seem to be able to process the output.

I have a script that does:

rm -r build
mkdir build
cp volume2.tex ./build
cd build
lilypond-book -V --psfonts -o output volume2.tex
cd output
latex volume2.tex

lilypond-book completes with:

Extracted feta-alphabet13
Extracted CenturySchL-Ital
Writing fonts to volume2.psfonts

DVIPS usage:
dvips -h output/volume2.psfonts output/volume2.dvi

Looking through the lilypond-book output, there are no errors but there are a 
couple of warnings.  The latex volume2.tex command gives this output:

This is TeX, Version 3.14159 (Web2C 7.4.5)
(./volume2.tex
LaTeX2e 2001/06/01
Babel v3.7h and hyphenation patterns for american, french, german, ngerman, 
n
ohyphenation, loaded.
(/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/base/book.cls
Document Class: book 2001/04/21 v1.4e Standard LaTeX document class
(/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/base/bk10.clo))
(/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/base/textcomp.sty
(/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/base/ts1enc.def))
(/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/fancyhdr/fancyhdr.sty)
No file volume2.aux.
(/usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/base/ts1cmr.fd)
No file volume2.toc.
[1] [2]
Part 9.
[1] (./lily-109005405-systems.tex
! Undefined control sequence.
l.1 \includegraphics
{lily-109005405-1.eps}
?

If I try to run lilypond-book a second time (just that single command), I get 
an odd error:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] build $ lilypond-book -V --psfonts -o output volume2.tex
lilypond-book (GNU LilyPond) 2.6.4
lilypond-book: error: Output would overwrite input file; use --output.
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File /usr/local/bin/lilypond-book, line 1620, in ?
main ()
  File /usr/local/bin/lilypond-book, line 1586, in main
chunks = do_file (file)
  File /usr/local/bin/lilypond-book, line 1446, in do_file
ly.exit (2)
  File /usr/local/share/lilypond/2.6.4/python/lilylib.py, line 139, in exit
raise _ ('Exiting (%d)...') % i
Exiting (2)...

Can someone point me in the right direction?  I ideally want PDF output but 
always went through dvi with version 2.0.

ta,

Tim.

On Sunday 13 Nov 2005 18:21, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
 Tim Sawyer wrote:
  I'm trying to upgrade from 2.0 to 2.6, and I'm having trouble.
 
 
  Anyone any ideas?  convert-ly seems to output it the same as it went in.

 Check out the manual section on drum notation. There have been some
 syntax changes.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading to 2.6 Help

[Graham Percival]

On 13-Nov-05, at 12:12 PM, Tim Sawyer wrote:


! Undefined control sequence.
l.1 \includegraphics
{lily-109005405-1.eps}
?


I believe that in 2.6, you need to add
\usepackage{graphics}

to your lilypond-book file.

Cheers,
- Graham



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading to 2.6 Help

[Graham Percival]

On 13-Nov-05, at 2:16 PM, Tim Sawyer wrote:

Thanks!  That now gets me a dvi I can preview.  Unfortunately, it has 
font
trouble  - I appear to be missing note heads and the time sig is in 
the wrong

font.

If I do a dvipdf volume2.dvi it gives the following output:


Try this:
dvips -h $1.psfonts -Ppdf $1.dvi
ps2pdf $1.ps

(where $1 is to be replaced by the filename)
If you want to use dvipdf, you'll have to figure out the command line 
options yourself, I'm afraid.


- Graham



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading lilypond prompts each time new problems with lilypond-book

[Mats Bengtsson]

What operating system do you use?

Does the command create any files at all in the directory out/ ?


  /Mats

Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:


I am sorry, but after upgrading Lilypond always I get a new problem with 
lilypond-book.
The newest one (2.6.3.1.):

###

lilypond-book --psfon ts -o out harmonielehre.lytex
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3.1 (GNU LilyPond) 2.6.3.1
harmonielehre.lytex lesen...
Zerlegen...
Schreibe AuszÃŒge...
Alle AuszÃŒge sind auf dem neuesten Stand...
harmonielehre.tex kompilieren...
harmonielehre.tex ist aktuell.
Verarbeite EinfÃŒgung: 01
./01.tex lesen...
Zerlegen...
Schreibe AuszÃŒge...
Alle AuszÃŒge sind auf dem neuesten Stand...
01.tex kompilieren...
01.tex ist aktuell.
Schriftarten werden nach harmonielehre.psfonts geschrieben...Traceback (most 
rec ent call last):
 File /usr/bin/lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3.1, line 1616, in ?
   main ()
 File /usr/bin/lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3.1, line 1593, in main
   [x.basename() + '.eps'
 File /usr/share/lilypond/2.6.3.1/python/fontextract.py, line 104, in extract 
_fonts
   d = scan_files (input_files)
 File /usr/share/lilypond/2.6.3.1/python/fontextract.py, line 27, in scan_fil 
es
   header = open (f, 'r').read ()
IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'lily-689790383.eps'

##

Thank you for helpful tips!
Wolfgang

 



--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
   Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading lilypond prompts each time new problems with lilypond-book

[Laura Conrad]

 MB == Mats Bengtsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

MB What operating system do you use?
MB Does the command create any files at all in the directory out/ ?

There was a lilypond-book bug in 2.6.3.  Someone claimed it was fixed
in cvs 15 minutes after the release.  It's on my list to check whether
2.6.4 fixed it; I certainly hope so, although Han-Wen claimed there
were only minor bugfixes.  

-- 
Laura (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] , http://www.laymusic.org/ )
(617) 661-8097  fax: (501) 641-5011
233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Problems after upgrading (lilypond-book)

[Mats Bengtsson]

Strange! Here are the results I get with version 2.6.3,

$ export LANG=en_US
$ lilypond-book -o out --psfonts /tmp/test.lytex
lilypond-book (GNU LilyPond) 2.6.3
Reading /tmp/test.lytex...
Dissecting...
Writing snippets...
All snippets are up to date...
Compiling test.tex...
test.tex is up to date.

DVIPS usage:
dvips -h out/test.psfonts out/test.dvi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lilypond-2.6]$ export LANG=de_DE
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lilypond-2.6]$ lilypond-book -o out --psfonts /tmp/test.lytex
Aufruf: lilypond-book [OPTIONEN]... DATEI

LilyPond-Auszüge in gemischtem HTML-, LaTeX- oder texinfo-Dokument 
verarbeiten.Beispiel-Aufrufe:


   lilypond-book --filter=tr '[a-z]' '[A-Z]' BUCH
   lilypond-book --filter=convert-ly --no-version --from=2.0.0 - BUCH
   lilypond-book --process='lilypond -I include' BUCH
...


Maybe you have some other locale related environment variable set.
What does the command 'locale' return? After an export LANG=en_US,
I get:

LANG=en_US
LC_CTYPE=en_US
LC_NUMERIC=en_US
LC_TIME=en_US
LC_COLLATE=en_US
LC_MONETARY=en_US
LC_MESSAGES=en_US
LC_PAPER=en_US
LC_NAME=en_US
LC_ADDRESS=en_US
LC_TELEPHONE=en_US
LC_MEASUREMENT=en_US
LC_IDENTIFICATION=en_US
LC_ALL=


   /Mats

Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:
I wrote 


export LANG=en_US
export LANG

in my \etc\profile.

Now I get the same messages in English. I am not realy a Linux
expert ...

Wolfgang

On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 20:49 +0200, Mats Bengtsson wrote:


Are you sure that you clear the $LANG environment variable in the same
shell as you call the lilypond-book program? It certainly solves the
problem over here.

   /Mats

Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:


It's to bad, but does not seem to be the solution. :-(, But thank you
for the fast answer!

Wolfgang

Am Samstag, den 06.08.2005, 17:05 +0200 schrieb Mats Bengtsson:



It seems to be some problems with the translations to local languages
in lilypond-book. The bug has already been reported to the lilypond-bug
mailing list and waiting for that, you can get rid of the problem by
doing
unset LANG
or
export LANG=en_US
which gives the default English warning and error messages but should
solve your problem.

  /Mats

Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:



Hi,

after upgrading to 2.6.3. (2.6.0 worked fine) I have a problem with
lilypond-book.

After

lilypond-book -o out test.lytex

I get this:
###
..
Layout nach »lily-244139305-1.eps« ausgeben...
Layout nach »lily-244139305.eps« ausgeben...


test.tex kompilieren...
Schreibe `test.tex'...
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: option --psfonts not used
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: Verarbeitung mit dvips wird keine
Schriftarten haben

DVIPS-Aufruf:
  dvips -h out/test.psfonts out/test.dvi
#

If I write

lilypond-book --psfonts test.lytex

I get a long report, what options are possible. 


Please help!

Wolfgang





--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Problems after upgrading (lilypond-book)

[Wolfgang Mechsner]

Hi,

after upgrading to 2.6.3. (2.6.0 worked fine) I have a problem with
lilypond-book.

After

lilypond-book -o out test.lytex

I get this:
###
..
Layout nach »lily-244139305-1.eps« ausgeben...
Layout nach »lily-244139305.eps« ausgeben...


test.tex kompilieren...
Schreibe `test.tex'...
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: option --psfonts not used
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: Verarbeitung mit dvips wird keine
Schriftarten haben

DVIPS-Aufruf:
dvips -h out/test.psfonts out/test.dvi
#

If I write

lilypond-book --psfonts test.lytex

I get a long report, what options are possible. 

Please help!

Wolfgang

-- 
Wolfgang Mechsner
Goebenstr. 3
49076 Osnabrück
Tel. 0541-2052090
Mobil 0179-9096684
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.wolfgang-mechsner.de



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Problems after upgrading (lilypond-book)

[Mats Bengtsson]

It seems to be some problems with the translations to local languages
in lilypond-book. The bug has already been reported to the lilypond-bug
mailing list and waiting for that, you can get rid of the problem by
doing
unset LANG
or
export LANG=en_US
which gives the default English warning and error messages but should
solve your problem.

   /Mats

Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:

Hi,

after upgrading to 2.6.3. (2.6.0 worked fine) I have a problem with
lilypond-book.

After

lilypond-book -o out test.lytex

I get this:
###
..
Layout nach »lily-244139305-1.eps« ausgeben...
Layout nach »lily-244139305.eps« ausgeben...


test.tex kompilieren...
Schreibe `test.tex'...
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: option --psfonts not used
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: Verarbeitung mit dvips wird keine
Schriftarten haben

DVIPS-Aufruf:
dvips -h out/test.psfonts out/test.dvi
#

If I write

lilypond-book --psfonts test.lytex

I get a long report, what options are possible. 


Please help!

Wolfgang



--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Problems after upgrading (lilypond-book)

[Wolfgang Mechsner]

It's to bad, but does not seem to be the solution. :-(, But thank you
for the fast answer!

Wolfgang

Am Samstag, den 06.08.2005, 17:05 +0200 schrieb Mats Bengtsson:
 It seems to be some problems with the translations to local languages
 in lilypond-book. The bug has already been reported to the lilypond-bug
 mailing list and waiting for that, you can get rid of the problem by
 doing
 unset LANG
 or
 export LANG=en_US
 which gives the default English warning and error messages but should
 solve your problem.
 
 /Mats
 
 Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:
  Hi,
  
  after upgrading to 2.6.3. (2.6.0 worked fine) I have a problem with
  lilypond-book.
  
  After
  
  lilypond-book -o out test.lytex
  
  I get this:
  ###
  ..
  Layout nach »lily-244139305-1.eps« ausgeben...
  Layout nach »lily-244139305.eps« ausgeben...
  
  
  test.tex kompilieren...
  Schreibe `test.tex'...
  lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: option --psfonts not used
  lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: Verarbeitung mit dvips wird keine
  Schriftarten haben
  
  DVIPS-Aufruf:
  dvips -h out/test.psfonts out/test.dvi
  #
  
  If I write
  
  lilypond-book --psfonts test.lytex
  
  I get a long report, what options are possible. 
  
  Please help!
  
  Wolfgang
  
 
-- 
Wolfgang Mechsner
Goebenstr. 3
49076 Osnabrück
Tel. 0541-2052090
Mobil 0179-9096684
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.wolfgang-mechsner.de



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Problems after upgrading (lilypond-book)

[Mats Bengtsson]

Are you sure that you clear the $LANG environment variable in the same
shell as you call the lilypond-book program? It certainly solves the
problem over here.

   /Mats

Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:

It's to bad, but does not seem to be the solution. :-(, But thank you
for the fast answer!

Wolfgang

Am Samstag, den 06.08.2005, 17:05 +0200 schrieb Mats Bengtsson:


It seems to be some problems with the translations to local languages
in lilypond-book. The bug has already been reported to the lilypond-bug
mailing list and waiting for that, you can get rid of the problem by
doing
unset LANG
or
export LANG=en_US
which gives the default English warning and error messages but should
solve your problem.

   /Mats

Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:


Hi,

after upgrading to 2.6.3. (2.6.0 worked fine) I have a problem with
lilypond-book.

After

lilypond-book -o out test.lytex

I get this:
###
..
Layout nach »lily-244139305-1.eps« ausgeben...
Layout nach »lily-244139305.eps« ausgeben...


test.tex kompilieren...
Schreibe `test.tex'...
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: option --psfonts not used
lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: Verarbeitung mit dvips wird keine
Schriftarten haben

DVIPS-Aufruf:
   dvips -h out/test.psfonts out/test.dvi
#

If I write

lilypond-book --psfonts test.lytex

I get a long report, what options are possible. 


Please help!

Wolfgang





--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Problems after upgrading (lilypond-book)

[Wolfgang Mechsner]

I wrote 

export LANG=en_US
export LANG

in my \etc\profile.

Now I get the same messages in English. I am not realy a Linux
expert ...

Wolfgang

On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 20:49 +0200, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
 Are you sure that you clear the $LANG environment variable in the same
 shell as you call the lilypond-book program? It certainly solves the
 problem over here.
 
 /Mats
 
 Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:
  It's to bad, but does not seem to be the solution. :-(, But thank you
  for the fast answer!
  
  Wolfgang
  
  Am Samstag, den 06.08.2005, 17:05 +0200 schrieb Mats Bengtsson:
  
 It seems to be some problems with the translations to local languages
 in lilypond-book. The bug has already been reported to the lilypond-bug
 mailing list and waiting for that, you can get rid of the problem by
 doing
 unset LANG
 or
 export LANG=en_US
 which gives the default English warning and error messages but should
 solve your problem.
 
 /Mats
 
 Wolfgang Mechsner wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
 after upgrading to 2.6.3. (2.6.0 worked fine) I have a problem with
 lilypond-book.
 
 After
 
 lilypond-book -o out test.lytex
 
 I get this:
 ###
 ..
 Layout nach »lily-244139305-1.eps« ausgeben...
 Layout nach »lily-244139305.eps« ausgeben...
 
 
 test.tex kompilieren...
 Schreibe `test.tex'...
 lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: option --psfonts not used
 lilypond-book-bin-2.6.3: Warnung: Verarbeitung mit dvips wird keine
 Schriftarten haben
 
 DVIPS-Aufruf:
 dvips -h out/test.psfonts out/test.dvi
 #
 
 If I write
 
 lilypond-book --psfonts test.lytex
 
 I get a long report, what options are possible. 
 
 Please help!
 
 Wolfgang
 
 
 
-- 
Wolfgang Mechsner
Goebenstr. 3
49076 Osnabrück
Tel. 0541-2052090
Mobil 0179-9096684
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.wolfgang-mechsner.de



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

upgrading

[Sacha Standen]

Hello

I've downloaded 
version 2.5.29-2 for Windows, but can't run the program. I'm using Windows ME. 
I've uninstalled the old version (2.4.3) through Cygwin setup and then installed 
2.5.29 and now have an icon on the desktop (marked ly and entitled lilypond) 
which didn't exist with the old version. But when I double click this icon, it 
appears to be opening and a window opens for a split second before disappearing 
again. Meanwhile I can't open any of my LilyPond files without reinstalling 
version 2.4.3. I've accessed the lilypad in properties', and I can save it as an 
ly file, but when Idouble click the iconto generate a PDF output it 
starts to process it for about one second, then closes the 'bash' window. Is 
this a bug or am I being 
incompetant?RegardsSacha
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: upgrading

[Mats Bengtsson]

If you look through the mailing list archives for the the lilypond-user,
lilypond-devel and bug-lilypond mailing lists over the last week or so,
you will see that there are some problems with Windows ME that hopefully
are being in the process of being solved right now.

   /Mats

Sacha Standen wrote:

Hello
 
I've downloaded version 2.5.29-2 for Windows, but can't run the program. 
I'm using Windows ME. I've uninstalled the old version (2.4.3) through 
Cygwin setup and then installed 2.5.29 and now have an icon on the 
desktop (marked ly and entitled lilypond) which didn't exist with the 
old version. But when I double click this icon, it appears to be opening 
and a window opens for a split second before disappearing again. 
Meanwhile I can't open any of my LilyPond files without reinstalling 
version 2.4.3. I've accessed the lilypad in properties', and I can save 
it as an ly file, but when I double click the icon to generate a PDF 
output it starts to process it for about one second, then closes the 
'bash' window. Is this a bug or am I being incompetant?


Regards

Sacha




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

upgrading

[Sacha Standen]

Hello

I've just downloaded an upgrade of version 2.5.29 
for windows (from 2.4.3), but can't install it properly; the Cygwin setup only 
gives me the option to uninstall, keep or reinstall version 2.4.3. I've 
re-downloaded the setup programme, uninstalled LilyPond and tried to reinstall, 
but it makes no difference. Any ideas?

Sacha

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: upgrading

[Graham Percival]

On 11-Jun-05, at 6:04 AM, Sacha Standen wrote:
I've just downloaded an upgrade of version 2.5.29 for windows (from 
2.4.3), but can't install it properly; the Cygwin setup only gives me 
the option to uninstall, keep or reinstall version 2.4.3. I've 
re-downloaded the setup programme, uninstalled LilyPond and tried to 
reinstall, but it makes no difference. Any ideas?


2.5.29 doesn't need Cygwin.  Uninstall 2.4.3 in cygwin, then install 
2.5.29 directly.
(sorry, I'm on OSX, so I don't know how to install the windows version, 
but I imagine

you just need to double-click on the icon)

Cheers,
- Graham



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Upgrading (was: Staff first barline (before cleff))

[Laura Conrad]

 MB == Mats Bengtsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

MB I really recommend you to upgrade to the latest stable version 2.4.x
MB as soon as possible, since it has improved significantly compared to
MB 2.0. Also, since almost nobody on the mailing list uses 2.0, it will
MB be hard to get relevant answers.

I use it.  It isn't possible for me to switch to 2.4 (or 2.5 in its
current state) because abc2ly is broken in a major  way.  (It
fails to translate key signatures.)  

And my brief testing doesn't convince me that it's a lot better for my
purposes, even if it worked.  See
http://www.laymusic.org/blosxom-static/publishing/ for pointers to
two pdf's with the same notes.   

Most of the differences are pretty subtle, but the change in
typography for the lyrics strikes you immediately.  I've been polling
my user community about which they like better, and nobody answers
immediately.  Certainly if the é in beauté really has an accent in the
2.5 version, it's less legible than the 2.0 version.  And in general,
the font is readable but not elegant.

I'm aware that there are some nifty new features since 2.0, which I
would like to use. However, it looks like lilypond may be expanding
features beyond the capacity of its development team to support them.
From the standpoint of a long-time user on LINUX (I'm aware that the
judgement may be different for a new user on Windows), 2.0 has some
maturity that seems lacking in 2.5.

-- 
Laura (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] , http://www.laymusic.org/ )
(617) 661-8097  fax: (501) 641-5011
233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading

[Erik Sandberg]

On Wednesday 20 April 2005 17.06, Laura Conrad wrote:
  MB == Mats Bengtsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 MB I really recommend you to upgrade to the latest stable version
 2.4.x MB as soon as possible, since it has improved significantly compared
 to MB 2.0. Also, since almost nobody on the mailing list uses 2.0, it will
 MB be hard to get relevant answers.

 I use it.  It isn't possible for me to switch to 2.4 (or 2.5 in its
 current state) because abc2ly is broken in a major  way.  (It
 fails to translate key signatures.)

One workaround could be to keep 2.0's abc2ly and pipe the output through 
convert-ly (if this works).

Erik


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Laura Conrad writes:

 I use it.  It isn't possible for me to switch to 2.4 (or 2.5 in its
 current state) because abc2ly is broken in a major  way.  (It
 fails to translate key signatures.)

Can we please have a proper bug report?  We do not want to ship known
to be broken software.

Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien   | http://www.lilypond.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Upgrading

[Laura Conrad]

 JN == Jan Nieuwenhuizen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

JN Laura Conrad writes:
 I use it.  It isn't possible for me to switch to 2.4 (or 2.5 in its
 current state) because abc2ly is broken in a major  way.  (It
 fails to translate key signatures.)

JN Can we please have a proper bug report?  We do not want to ship known
JN to be broken software.

What's improper about 
http://www.google.com/url?sa=Ustart=1q=http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2005-02/msg00113.htmle=9797
from last February, or 
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2005-04/msg00146.html
from last Saturday?

-- 
Laura (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] , http://www.laymusic.org/ )
(617) 661-8097  fax: (501) 641-5011
233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Issue upgrading from 2.2 to 2.4

[Joshua Koo]

I got that error too on 3 machines with a fresh 2.4.2 cygwin lilypond install.
I guess its harmless, except lilytool for jedit would freeze if you tried to 
use the jdvi feature :(

If you search the mailing list archives, you'll find out that
it's harmless but you'll also find out how to get rid of the
warning.

   /Mats

Quoting Aaron Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Graham Percival wrote:
 
  On 12-Mar-05, at 7:09 PM, Aaron Dalton wrote:
 
  I run Lilypond under WinXP and Cygwin.  I had typeset a number of
  William Byrd pieces under Lilypond 2.2 and have now upgraded to 2.4.
  Now my pieces don't compile.  The top of my source file is as follows:
 
 
  --BEGIN TOP OF FILE--
  \version 2.4.2
 
 
  Did you update using convert-ly ?  It looks like you simply changed the
  version
  number on this line.  If so, please change this back to 2.2.5 (or
  whatever),
  then run
  convert-ly -e FILENAME.ly
 
  The resulting file should compile correctly.
 
  I just can't seem to find any reason for this to happen.  I assume I
  have missed some major change to the way 2.4 works.  Can anybody out
  there give me a hand?
 
 
  We no longer use \notes {}.  But convert-ly should fix that automatically.
 
  Cheers,
  - Graham
 

 Oh, indeed everything compiles fine and I get my beautiful looking PDF,
 but I get the following error as well:

 Error invoking `latex \\nonstopmode \\input 3voices-agnusdei.tex 
 /dev/null 21 '. Return value 256

 Everything appears to still work though.  Any ideas?

 Cheers!
 Aaron


 ___
 lilypond-user mailing list
 lilypond-user@gnu.org
 http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user








___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Issue upgrading from 2.2 to 2.4

[Graham Percival]

On 12-Mar-05, at 7:09 PM, Aaron Dalton wrote:
I run Lilypond under WinXP and Cygwin.  I had typeset a number of 
William Byrd pieces under Lilypond 2.2 and have now upgraded to 2.4. 
Now my pieces don't compile.  The top of my source file is as follows:

--BEGIN TOP OF FILE--
\version 2.4.2
Did you update using convert-ly ?  It looks like you simply changed the 
version
number on this line.  If so, please change this back to 2.2.5 (or 
whatever),
then run
convert-ly -e FILENAME.ly

The resulting file should compile correctly.
I just can't seem to find any reason for this to happen.  I assume I 
have missed some major change to the way 2.4 works.  Can anybody out 
there give me a hand?
We no longer use \notes {}.  But convert-ly should fix that 
automatically.

Cheers,
- Graham

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Issue upgrading from 2.2 to 2.4

[Aaron Dalton]

Graham Percival wrote:
On 12-Mar-05, at 7:09 PM, Aaron Dalton wrote:
I run Lilypond under WinXP and Cygwin.  I had typeset a number of 
William Byrd pieces under Lilypond 2.2 and have now upgraded to 2.4. 
Now my pieces don't compile.  The top of my source file is as follows:

--BEGIN TOP OF FILE--
\version 2.4.2

Did you update using convert-ly ?  It looks like you simply changed the 
version
number on this line.  If so, please change this back to 2.2.5 (or 
whatever),
then run
convert-ly -e FILENAME.ly

The resulting file should compile correctly.
I just can't seem to find any reason for this to happen.  I assume I 
have missed some major change to the way 2.4 works.  Can anybody out 
there give me a hand?

We no longer use \notes {}.  But convert-ly should fix that automatically.
Cheers,
- Graham
I had never seen convert-ly before.  After reading the manpage, 
everything worked just fine.  Thank you all so much!!

Cheers!
Aaron

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Issue upgrading from 2.2 to 2.4

[Aaron Dalton]

Graham Percival wrote:
On 12-Mar-05, at 7:09 PM, Aaron Dalton wrote:
I run Lilypond under WinXP and Cygwin.  I had typeset a number of 
William Byrd pieces under Lilypond 2.2 and have now upgraded to 2.4. 
Now my pieces don't compile.  The top of my source file is as follows:

--BEGIN TOP OF FILE--
\version 2.4.2

Did you update using convert-ly ?  It looks like you simply changed the 
version
number on this line.  If so, please change this back to 2.2.5 (or 
whatever),
then run
convert-ly -e FILENAME.ly

The resulting file should compile correctly.
I just can't seem to find any reason for this to happen.  I assume I 
have missed some major change to the way 2.4 works.  Can anybody out 
there give me a hand?

We no longer use \notes {}.  But convert-ly should fix that automatically.
Cheers,
- Graham
Oh, indeed everything compiles fine and I get my beautiful looking PDF, 
but I get the following error as well:

Error invoking `latex \\nonstopmode \\input 3voices-agnusdei.tex  
/dev/null 21 '. Return value 256

Everything appears to still work though.  Any ideas?
Cheers!
Aaron
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Issue upgrading from 2.2 to 2.4

[Mats Bengtsson]

If you search the mailing list archives, you'll find out that
it's harmless but you'll also find out how to get rid of the
warning.

   /Mats

Quoting Aaron Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Graham Percival wrote:
 
  On 12-Mar-05, at 7:09 PM, Aaron Dalton wrote:
 
  I run Lilypond under WinXP and Cygwin.  I had typeset a number of
  William Byrd pieces under Lilypond 2.2 and have now upgraded to 2.4.
  Now my pieces don't compile.  The top of my source file is as follows:
 
 
  --BEGIN TOP OF FILE--
  \version 2.4.2
 
 
  Did you update using convert-ly ?  It looks like you simply changed the
  version
  number on this line.  If so, please change this back to 2.2.5 (or
  whatever),
  then run
  convert-ly -e FILENAME.ly
 
  The resulting file should compile correctly.
 
  I just can't seem to find any reason for this to happen.  I assume I
  have missed some major change to the way 2.4 works.  Can anybody out
  there give me a hand?
 
 
  We no longer use \notes {}.  But convert-ly should fix that automatically.
 
  Cheers,
  - Graham
 

 Oh, indeed everything compiles fine and I get my beautiful looking PDF,
 but I get the following error as well:

 Error invoking `latex \\nonstopmode \\input 3voices-agnusdei.tex 
 /dev/null 21 '. Return value 256

 Everything appears to still work though.  Any ideas?

 Cheers!
 Aaron


 ___
 lilypond-user mailing list
 lilypond-user@gnu.org
 http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Issue upgrading from 2.2 to 2.4

[Aaron Dalton]

I run Lilypond under WinXP and Cygwin.  I had typeset a number of 
William Byrd pieces under Lilypond 2.2 and have now upgraded to 2.4. 
Now my pieces don't compile.  The top of my source file is as follows:

--BEGIN TOP OF FILE--
\version 2.4.2
\header {
title = Mass for Three Voices
composer = William Byrd
piece = Agnus Dei
}
supMusic = \notes \relative f' {
f2. c4 f8 \melisma  g a2 g4 \melismaEnd a2 r4
bes4 a4. g8 f4 f~ f e d \melisma a' \melismaEnd g2 r2
a4 bes4 c4. f,8 bes4 \melisma a4. g8 a f a4 g \melismaEnd f d e
g4. d8 f4~ f \melisma e \melismaEnd f2 r4
f4 a c~ c8 g bes2 \melisma a8 g \melismaEnd a1~ a1
r1 r1 r1 r1 r1 r1 r1 r1 r1 r1 r2
a2~ a4 f a2~ a4 \melisma g8 bes a4 g8 f e4 f2 \melismaEnd e4 r2
a2~ a4 f a4. \melisma g8 f4 g8 bes a4 g8 f \melismaEnd e4 f2
\melisma e4 \melismaEnd f2 r2 r4
bes,4 f'4. g8 a4 bes2 a4 g2 f r4
a2 f4 g a bes2 a4 c4. \melisma g8 bes4 \melismaEnd a2 a4.
\melisma g16 f \melismaEnd e2 r4
f~ f e g4. d8 f4 \melisma e4. d8 d4~ d cis \melismaEnd d2 r1 r4
a'2 g4 c4. a8 bes4 \melisma a~ a8 g f e f4 d \melismaEnd e a4. f8
g4~ g8 f f2 \melisma e8 d e2 \melismaEnd f~ f1
\bar |.
}
--END TOP OF FILE--
This results in the following error:
test.ly:9:17: error: unknown escaped string: `\notes':
supMusic = \notes
  \relative f' {
*but* the file completes compiling with some semblance of readable 
output.  However, once I put the score part in...

--BEGIN \SCORE SECTION--
\score {
\notes 
\context Staff = superius 
\set Staff.instrument = Superius
\set Staff.instr = Sup
\set Staff.autoBeaming = ##f
\clef treble
\time 4/4
\key f \major
\context Voice = superius \supMusic
 %superius staff
\context Lyrics = superius \lyricsto superius \supWords
\context Staff = supAnalysis 
\clef treble
\time 4/4
\key f \major
\notes \repeat unfold 53 { s1 }

\context Staff = supAnalysisB 
\clef treble
\time 4/4
\key f \major
\notes \repeat unfold 53 { s1 }

 %notes
\layout {
\context {
\Voice
\consists Ambitus_engraver
}
}
\midi { \tempo 4 . = 120 }
} %score
--END \SCORE SECTION--
Then I get a whole bunch of the following error and nothing is generated 
at all.

test.ly:42:7: error: unknown escaped string: `\notes':
\notes
   
test.ly:42:6: error: syntax error, unexpected STRING:
\note
 s 
I just can't seem to find any reason for this to happen.  I assume I 
have missed some major change to the way 2.4 works.  Can anybody out 
there give me a hand?

I sincerely appreciate your time and attention.
Aaron
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: problems upgrading input files from lilypond 1.6.6

[Mats Bengtsson]

It seems that the situations where convert-ly fails on your input
files is
- Where you put the slur end on another line than the following note:
 ef4.( )
 f!8
  If instead you had written
 ef4.(
 ) f!8
   convert-ly would correctly have produced
 ef4.(
 f!8 )
   As you can see, slur endings as well as all other kind of
  annotations are now put after the note they refer to.
- Where you use the old text markup commands, like
  ^#'(columns((music scripts-trill))) or
  ^#'(columns((music accidentals--1)))
  (by the way, I don't understand why you used columns here)
  You can read more about the new markup commands at
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.2/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Text-markup.html
  The two examples above can be replaced by
  ^\markup{ \musicglyph scripts-trill }
  and
  ^\markup{ \flat }
  respectively.
See also 
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.2/Documentation/topdocs/out-www/NEWS.html
for a quick overview of what has changed.

   /Mats
Jacob Smullyan wrote:
Hi --
I did a bit of work with lilypond 1.6.6 14 months ago and have an
unfinished composition typeset in it that I'd like to go back to.  But
I no longer have lilypond 1.6.6 installed, and it doesn't build on my
Gentoo Linux system (alas, C++ compiler problems); and lilypond 2.2.4,
even when I run convert-ly -f 1.6.6 -e  on my .ly files, fails on
them with numerous syntax errors.
The syntax seems to have changed a great deal in a single year, which
is no doubt is great for the project's future, but is rough on
occasional users like me.  There isn't much documentation on how to
upgrade input files, either (but I'm not complaining -- I appreciate
all the energy that is going into the project).  The result is that
I'm a bit lost, and I'd be very grateful for any pointers on what
particular kinds of changes I should be looking for.
The input files in question (in their 1.6.6 version) are viewable
here:
  http://cvs.smullyan.org/viewcvs.cgi/trio/
They are quite short.
Thanks much,
Jacob Smullyan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user