- Original Message -
From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org
To: Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net
Cc: Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:48 AM
Subject: Re: Regtest 2.17.13
Phil Holmes writes:
Mainly, it's written in C# on windows, so it
couldn't
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note - the output
shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe contained the wrong version
number). Output is at
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/regtestresults/2.17.13/
As might be supposed, most of the differences are connecting bar
Phil Holmes writes:
I've run my pixel comparator
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/regtestresults/2.17.13/
Nice. Is there any reason for not running this as part of the
release process in GUB and having it available next to
http://lilypond.org/test/
Greetings, Jan
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note - the
output shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe contained the wrong
version number). Output is at
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/regtestresults/2.17.13/
As might be supposed,
Hello,
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note - the
output shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe contained the wrong
version number). Output is at
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note -
the output shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe
contained the
On 25 févr. 2013, at 15:10, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note -
the output shows this as
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
Hello,
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note -
the
output shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe
m...@mikesolomon.org m...@mikesolomon.org writes:
On 25 févr. 2013, at 15:10, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on
- Original Message -
From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org
To: Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net
Cc: Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: Regtest 2.17.13
Phil Holmes writes:
I've run my pixel comparator
Nice. Is there any reason
Maybe we should put span bars and possibly other metrically
challenged elements into the ever-changing regtest.
Nice idea!
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
2013/2/25 Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note - the output
shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe contained the wrong version
number). Output is at
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/regtestresults/2.17.13/
As might be supposed,
Phil Holmes writes:
Mainly, it's written in C# on windows, so it
couldn't actually be run as part of GUB. I run it on my desktop
Is this an purely added-value, extra nice to have, or does LilyPond
somehow depend on it?
If anyone wants to do it, I'd be happy to provide the programs.
What
13 matches
Mail list logo
