2011/6/11 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
2.15.1 has fontforge 20110222.
= fontforge 20110222 is required for building 2.15
and
!= fontforge 20110222 included in lilydev, but it will be?
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:44:14PM +0200, Jan Warchoł wrote:
2011/6/11 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
2.15.1 has fontforge 20110222.
= fontforge 20110222 is required for building 2.15
It is not required. It is optional. It will become required once
it's in lilydev.
Cheers,
-
2.15.1 has fontforge 20110222. I'll upload 2.14.1 with the same
fontforge unless anybody screams in the next 24 hours.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 6/11/11 9:34 AM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
2.15.1 has fontforge 20110222. I'll upload 2.14.1 with the same
fontforge unless anybody screams in the next 24 hours.
AFAICS, there's no problem with 20110222. I don't think you need to worry
about waiting.
Carl
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 09:39:07AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 6/11/11 9:34 AM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
2.15.1 has fontforge 20110222. I'll upload 2.14.1 with the same
fontforge unless anybody screams in the next 24 hours.
AFAICS, there's no problem with
On 6/11/11 9:42 AM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 09:39:07AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 6/11/11 9:34 AM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
2.15.1 has fontforge 20110222. I'll upload 2.14.1 with the same
fontforge unless anybody
I'm saying this because Werner has been using 20110222 for a long
time, [...]
Actually, I'm using a more recent git version (from 2011-06-02);
however, this still identifies as 20110222. And as far as it is
related to the intersection problems, nothing has changed.
Werner
