Re: Running gdb on lilypond with -I args

[Andrew Bernard]

Ah. Hoping this may be useful to others. I was using gdb incorrectly.

One needs to say:

$ gdb --args /usr/local/bin/lilpond -I... -I... -I... file.ly

and then when in gdb simply, run:

(gdb) run

[I was foolishly saying run file.ly.]

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

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[H. S. Teoh]

On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 11:12:29AM +1100, Andrew Bernard wrote:
>Ubuntu now only supports guile 2 in its own repositories.
>How does on obtain the guile 1.8 needed to build lilypond for
>Ubuntu 18.10? Do we have to build from the source repository? If
>so, what exact release?
[...]

Others have already answered, but I'd like to provide another data point
in case some people find it helpful.  I use a Debian/sid system, so it
shares a lot of commonality with Ubuntu, but should apply to a wider
range of Debian-based distros.

I've also run into the problem that guile 1.8 is no longer in the
official Debian repos, so I had to download guile-1.8 from gnu.org
instead.  I discovered that it *is* possible to install guile-1.8
outside the usual places (/usr, /usr/local) where it might conflict with
newer versions of guile; I chose to install it under /usr/src/guile-1.8
where I can keep it self-contained to only stuff that actually needs 1.8
specifically. This is done by configuring guile-1.8 like this:

cd /path/to/guile-1.8/sources/
./configure --prefix=/usr/src/guile-1.8 
CFLAGS="-Wno-unused-but-set-variable -Wno-misleading-indentation 
-Wno-deprecated-declarations"

Guile configured this way would not be found by lilypond by default, so
lilypond needs to be compiled with an overridden $PATH.  I also found
that I needed python-2.7 (rather than python3), so that needs to be
configured specially as well.  So the lilypond configure command I use
is:

PATH=/usr/src/guile-1.8/bin:$PATH ./autogen.sh 
--with-python-include=/usr/include/python2.7/ CFLAGS="-Wno-sequence-point" 
LDFLAGS="-Wl,-rpath,/usr/src/guile-1.8/lib"

It's possible to install lilypond outside of /usr or /usr/local by using
the --prefix option, if desired.  This configuration won't build
directly, though, so you'd have to do this:

export PATH=/usr/src/guile-1.8/bin:$PATH
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/src/guile-1.8/lib
make

And unless you point your library paths to the right place, the lilypond
executable may not be able to find libguile*.so, so I use this wrapper
script instead (put it in /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin or /home/bin,
wherever $PATH can find it):

#!/bin/sh
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/src/guile-1.8/lib
/path/to/installdir/lilypond "$*"

Using this method, I was able to compile and install an isolated version
of lilypond that could coexist alongside the official Debian
libguile/python/lilypond packages.


T

-- 
It said to install Windows 2000 or better, so I installed Linux instead.

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

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi folks,

Not ever meaning to offend anybody on the list. When I said it was amusing,
sarcasm was far from my mind (although I confess it reads that way due to
my poor expression, for which I offer my apologies). What I failed to say
is that I really did find it funny. because suddenly everybody wanted lots
of addenda and additions to the Point and Click doco I and I saw myself
having to work for months on such a project, and I giggled at the amount of
work I had created for myself unwittingly. Amusing was the wrong word. I
probably mean fascinating, because it shows there is certainly a strong
demand for this sort of doco that does not quite fit as terse reference
material in the NR, and it's not quite right for the Usage manual either.
Still looking to find a suitable, highly accessible location for it.

While on this, it's interesting that Ubuntu under the Windows subsystem is
slightly different. I wonder what version of Ubuntu you were using? Maybe
this brief set of instructions in this thread that I put together could
form a more generalised sort of HOWTO document, something that the lilypond
ecosystem does not really have many of at present.

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

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[David Wright]

On Sat 23 Mar 2019 at 14:01:59 (+1100), Andrew Bernard wrote:
> Are you meaning to insult me with this comment Saul? Does not seem
> justified.

Well, Saul's original comment was a reply to my post, not yours.
It attempted to answer my implied question about the necessary
location of guile libraries. It might have been more polite to
prefix your comment with "Thanks, but".

I didn't realise you were writing a general guide to anything.
Nor do I know whether you have to *build* guile in order to
build LP, which is what was in your OP. (Obviously it's different
when you want the debugging symbols included in guile itself.)

> On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 13:19, Saul Tobin  wrote:
> 
> > My WSL runs Ubuntu, so I would have guessed the guile install directory is
> > the same. Either way, sorry for posting information that might be useful to
> > others reading the mailing list.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Andrew Bernard]

Are you meaning to insult me with this comment Saul? Does not seem
justified.

Andrew


On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 13:19, Saul Tobin  wrote:

> My WSL runs Ubuntu, so I would have guessed the guile install directory is
> the same. Either way, sorry for posting information that might be useful to
> others reading the mailing list.
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Running gdb on lilypond with -I args

[Andrew Bernard]

Trying to run lilypond under gdb so that it picks up my include
directories. Invoking this has no effect on the args gdb uses when calling
run in gdb:

gdb --args /usr/local/bin/lilypond -I $HOME/lib/lilypond -I
$HOME/lib/openlilylib/snippets -I /home/andro/lib/openlilylib

Where is my mistake? Adding quotes to each -I option has no effect. The
only examples I can see from google all use simple arguments, not -I flag
types. Strange lack of info.

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

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Saul Tobin]

My WSL runs Ubuntu, so I would have guessed the guile install directory is
the same. Either way, sorry for posting information that might be useful to
others reading the mailing list.

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:57 PM Andrew Bernard 
wrote:

> Hi Saul,
>
> I am only referring to Ubuntu. This is not meant to be a general guide for
> all systems.
>
> Funny, when I wrote the notes on getting point and click working with gvim
> under Ubuntu 18.10 specifically, everybody immediately wanted to correct it
> for a dozen other platforms. Amusing in a way.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 12:36, Saul Tobin 
> wrote:
>
>> I followed the process described above to compile Guile 1.8 and Lilypond
>> on Windows Subsystem for Linux. I found that it only worked when installing
>> guile to /usr, not /usr/local.
>>
>> ___
> 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: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Saul,

I am only referring to Ubuntu. This is not meant to be a general guide for
all systems.

Funny, when I wrote the notes on getting point and click working with gvim
under Ubuntu 18.10 specifically, everybody immediately wanted to correct it
for a dozen other platforms. Amusing in a way.

Andrew


On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 12:36, Saul Tobin  wrote:

> I followed the process described above to compile Guile 1.8 and Lilypond
> on Windows Subsystem for Linux. I found that it only worked when installing
> guile to /usr, not /usr/local.
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Saul Tobin]

I followed the process described above to compile Guile 1.8 and Lilypond on
Windows Subsystem for Linux. I found that it only worked when installing
guile to /usr, not /usr/local.

Saul

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019, 6:24 PM David Wright 
wrote:

> On Sat 23 Mar 2019 at 11:12:29 (+1100), Andrew Bernard wrote:
> > Ubuntu now only supports guile 2 in its own repositories.
>
> AFAICT Debian stretch has the same limitation, but the lilypond
> package has guile-1.8 and its libs bundled within.
> Each of the lilypond.org versions also has guile included.
> Their identically named files have different dates and sizes.
>
> > How does on obtain the guile 1.8 needed to build lilypond for Ubuntu
> 18.10?
> > Do we have to build from the source repository? If so, what exact
> release?
>
> Perhaps you could install guile and its libs yourself. I haven't
> checked whether /usr/local/… would suffice or if they have to be
> in the main library locations.
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>
> ___
> 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: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Harm,

This is great, thanks. Spent all morning trying to figure out why
--disable-werror with configure would not work. Just the wrong flag. Now
that I am aware of my stupidity I have been able to build from the code in
the git repo with no problem at all. I have been through all this a while
ago. One of these days I will learn to take notes and write it all down!

For any others interested, I did:

git clone git://git.sv.gnu.org/guile.git
cd guile
git checkout release_1-8-8
./autogen.sh (this step is not mentioned in the readme's etc)
./configure -disable-error-on-warning
make
sudo make install



Andrew



On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 12:17, Thomas Morley 
wrote:

>
> Do configure with option:
> ./configure --disable-error-on-warning
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi David,

Thanks, I know. I don't need guile as such, but need to build lilypond from
source with debugging symbols in order to debug a strange crash I am having
and an odd situation where all my tuplet brackets are becoming too short by
a seemingly variable and random factor (weird).

Andrew


On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 12:24, David Wright 
wrote:

>
> AFAICT Debian stretch has the same limitation, but the lilypond
> package has guile-1.8 and its libs bundled within.
> Each of the lilypond.org versions also has guile included.
> Their identically named files have different dates and sizes.
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[David Wright]

On Sat 23 Mar 2019 at 11:12:29 (+1100), Andrew Bernard wrote:
> Ubuntu now only supports guile 2 in its own repositories.

AFAICT Debian stretch has the same limitation, but the lilypond
package has guile-1.8 and its libs bundled within.
Each of the lilypond.org versions also has guile included.
Their identically named files have different dates and sizes.

> How does on obtain the guile 1.8 needed to build lilypond for Ubuntu 18.10?
> Do we have to build from the source repository? If so, what exact release?

Perhaps you could install guile and its libs yourself. I haven't
checked whether /usr/local/… would suffice or if they have to be
in the main library locations.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Thomas Morley]

Am Sa., 23. März 2019 um 01:20 Uhr schrieb Andrew Bernard
:
>
> Ubuntu now only supports guile 2 in its own repositories.
>
> How does on obtain the guile 1.8 needed to build lilypond for Ubuntu 18.10? 
> Do we have to build from the source repository? If so, what exact release?
>
> Andrew

Hi Andrew,

because I need to switch guile frequently, I compile the guile-version
I need from a tarball or git repository.

For your purpose there may be easier methods. Though here what I do:

The 1.8.8-tarball can be found here:
ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guile/guile-1.8.8.tar.gz
Do configure with option:
./configure --disable-error-on-warning

The git-repository is available from the guile site. I use that
repository to build newer guile-versions or for experiments, though
you likely can build 1.8.8 from there as well.
Checkout
remotes/origin/branch_release-1-8
and again with
./configure --disable-error-on-warning
I've seen there are some newer commits by Thien-Thi Nguyen. I did not
look into them, though.

HTH,
  Harm

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

Guile for building lilypond on Ubuntu18.10

[Andrew Bernard]

Ubuntu now only supports guile 2 in its own repositories.

How does on obtain the guile 1.8 needed to build lilypond for Ubuntu 18.10?
Do we have to build from the source repository? If so, what exact release?

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

Bach, beams, and benchmarks

[Chad Linsley]

Hi all,

I’m by no means a seasoned Lilypond pro but I’ve been exploring how the
program handles beams. In the essay, the 1950 Barenreiter Bach cello suite
edition is held up as a benchmark of high quality engraving. Seeing this
really helps the user understand why Lilypond’s default slurs are shaped
the way they are (not overly curvaceous). However, when I entered the first
few systems, the beaming was much steeper than in the Barenreiter. It only
started looking closer to it when I put a blank measure on the end (three
measures to system = tighter spacing). I then tried the various tweaking
parameters for beams which worked fine on a beam-to-beam basis. What I’m
curious about is whether or not Lilypond can be set to produce beaming
closer to the Barenreiter without quite as much intervention. For example,
the damping factor didn’t respond very sensitively when I tried using
decimal points.

Does anyone have any ideas? Thanks!

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

Re: Help running gdb

[Richard Shann]

On Sat, 2019-03-23 at 02:28 +1100, Andrew Bernard wrote:
> Running gdb does not seem to be a simple matter of saying 'gdb
> lilypond'. My lilypond executable is the shell script in ~/bin, a
> normal installation. Gbd wont run on that.

just create a variant on the shell script with gdb before the actual
executable launch. Make it executable and run that...

HTH

Richard


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

Help running gdb

[Andrew Bernard]

Running gdb does not seem to be a simple matter of saying 'gdb lilypond'.
My lilypond executable is the shell script in ~/bin, a normal installation.
Gbd wont run on that.

If I run gdb on the actual executable, do I need to set up load library
paths and all sorts of other things?

Do I need to run gdb on a self compiled version of lilypond (not a problem,
if so).

Any help appreciated.

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

Re: Frescobaldi website in English

[Tim Slattery]

Ralph Palmer  wrote:

>Beautiful! Thanks, Wilbert. And thanks again for the wonderful program. I
>use it for all my LilyPond entry.

Oh, amen!!! I don't know who I ever used Lily without it!

-- 
Tim Slattery
tim  risingdove  com


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

Re: Slightly off-topic

[Ralph Palmer]

Thanks, Urs - Yes, I did know about the Spanish translation. I'm trying to
help a Spanish-speaking person in Cuba possibly get started with LilyPond
and Frescobaldi, and back-and-forth communication is limited. So is my
Spanish.

Ralph

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:08 AM Urs Liska  wrote:

> But you know that Frescobaldi itself has a Spanish translation?
>
> Of course I have no idea how good and complete that is.
>
> Urs
>


-- 
Ralph Palmer
Brattleboro, VT
USA
palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Snippet: Customizing markFormatter

[Aaron Hill]

On 2019-03-22 1:32 am, Valentin Villenave wrote:

On 3/21/19, Aaron Hill  wrote:

In an attempt to hide the Scheme-ness of the above approach, I put
together the following music function which replaces placeholder 
strings

within the provided markup with the output of the specified formatter
function:


Hi Aaron,
I like what you’re doing! I wonder, though, if there couldn’t be a way
of ``hiding the Scheme-ness’’ without having to add a whole new
function. Besides, \set  =  is not something we
necessarily want to hide.


That is a fair point.  It would be easy enough to change 
\customMarkFormatter so that the \set must appear outside:



customMarkFormatter = #(define-scheme-function (markup) (markup?)
  (define (handle-formatter mark context markup)
(let* ((sym (and (string? markup)
 (string-prefix? "format-mark" markup)
 (string->symbol markup)))
   (proc (and sym (defined? sym) (primitive-eval sym
  (if (procedure? proc) (proc mark context) markup)))
  (define (markup-fixup mark context markup)
(if (list? markup)
  (map (lambda (elem) (markup-fixup mark context elem)) markup)
  (handle-formatter mark context markup)))
  (lambda (mark context) (markup-fixup mark context markup)))

% ...and later on... %

\set Score.markFormatter = \customMarkFormatter
  \markup \rotate #30 format-mark-circle-numbers



In other words, I dream of having the ability to do just:

\set Score.markFormatter = \markup \italic \etc


The tricky thing with \etc as a pattern is that it presumes something 
fundamentally singular.  While this aligns to the existing formatters 
which only emit one string, someone might want to have rehearsal marks 
that also include the current bar number.  The formatter ideally should 
provide the ability to reference multiple contextual properties.


Side note: I do think \etc could be beneficial in a more general sense 
with markups and stencils.  It is sometimes the case that folks desire 
to augment an existing stencil rather than completely replace it.  
Thankfully, grob-transformer is a useful tool for supporting this 
strategy.  A nice shortcut would be to use \etc as the placeholder for 
the original stencil, and perhaps its presence could be detected and the 
equivalent usage be automatically generated:



\tweak stencil \markup \box \etc

% ...turns into... %

\tweak stencil #(grob-transformer 'stencil (lambda (grob orig)
  (grob-interpret-markup grob #{ \markup \box \stencil $orig #})))



Now, the current "formatter" functions act in two ways: translating
(determining whether marks should be expressed as roman/arabic
numbers, upper/lower case letters including "i" or not) and formatting
(do we want marks to be circled or boxed or italicized or whatever). I
think it would be saner to separate the two:

\set Score.markFormatter = \markup \box \italic #uppercase-letter-etc
\set Score.markFormatter = \markup \circle #arabic-number-etc

I used # instead of \ to clearly illustrate that the last item is not
a markup function, but it could (should) be otherwise.


This pattern resolves the issue I mentioned before, as one is able to be 
explicit about which translated property (or properties) they would like 
to insert and where.


Would you agree with such a solution? (Regardless of how we implement 
it.)


At the end of the day, I am always for separation of concerns.

On 2019-03-22 1:44 am, David Kastrup wrote:
We probably should just extract the respective context variables and 
put

them in the markup property list for whatever markup command wants to
use them, like we do with title fields.


Would that be something like: \fromproperty #'score:rehearsalMark ?

In terms of extracting variables, is this something that can be done 
automagically for all properties?  Or does it necessitate manual 
selection?


My concern would be that what entails "the respective context variables" 
might end up being too constrained.  Currently, rehearsalMark and 
currentBarNumber are probably the only practical variables to extract; 
but who knows if there isn't something else that could find usefulness 
down the road.



-- Aaron Hill

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

Re: Slightly off-topic

[Urs Liska]

Am 21.03.19 um 01:47 schrieb Ralph Palmer:

Greetings, and my apologies -

I'm a long-time and dedicated LilyPond/Frescobaldi user. I would like 
to help some Spanish-speaking people get started with LilyPond and 
Frescobaldi. I can access the Spanish language LilyPond sites, but I 
can't find a URL for the Frescobaldi Spanish site or a Spanish 
language user's mailing list. Can anyone help? I can't even find the 
Frescobaldi English site anymore!



But you know that Frescobaldi itself has a Spanish translation?


Of course I have no idea how good and complete that is.

Urs




All the best,

Ralph

--
Ralph Palmer
Brattleboro, VT
USA
palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com 

___
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: Snippet: Customizing markFormatter

[David Kastrup]

Valentin Villenave  writes:

> On 3/21/19, Aaron Hill  wrote:
>> In an attempt to hide the Scheme-ness of the above approach, I put
>> together the following music function which replaces placeholder strings
>> within the provided markup with the output of the specified formatter
>> function:
>
> Hi Aaron,
> I like what you’re doing! I wonder, though, if there couldn’t be a way
> of ``hiding the Scheme-ness’’ without having to add a whole new
> function. Besides, \set  =  is not something we
> necessarily want to hide.
>
> In other words, I dream of having the ability to do just:
>
> \set Score.markFormatter = \markup \italic \etc
>
> Now, the current "formatter" functions act in two ways: translating
> (determining whether marks should be expressed as roman/arabic
> numbers, upper/lower case letters including "i" or not) and formatting
> (do we want marks to be circled or boxed or italicized or whatever). I
> think it would be saner to separate the two:
>
> \set Score.markFormatter = \markup \box \italic #uppercase-letter-etc
> \set Score.markFormatter = \markup \circle #arabic-number-etc
>
> I used # instead of \ to clearly illustrate that the last item is not
> a markup function, but it could (should) be otherwise.
>
> Would you agree with such a solution? (Regardless of how we implement it.)

We probably should just extract the respective context variables and put
them in the markup property list for whatever markup command wants to
use them, like we do with title fields.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: Snippet: Customizing markFormatter

[Valentin Villenave]

On 3/21/19, Aaron Hill  wrote:
> In an attempt to hide the Scheme-ness of the above approach, I put
> together the following music function which replaces placeholder strings
> within the provided markup with the output of the specified formatter
> function:

Hi Aaron,
I like what you’re doing! I wonder, though, if there couldn’t be a way
of ``hiding the Scheme-ness’’ without having to add a whole new
function. Besides, \set  =  is not something we
necessarily want to hide.

In other words, I dream of having the ability to do just:

\set Score.markFormatter = \markup \italic \etc

Now, the current "formatter" functions act in two ways: translating
(determining whether marks should be expressed as roman/arabic
numbers, upper/lower case letters including "i" or not) and formatting
(do we want marks to be circled or boxed or italicized or whatever). I
think it would be saner to separate the two:

\set Score.markFormatter = \markup \box \italic #uppercase-letter-etc
\set Score.markFormatter = \markup \circle #arabic-number-etc

I used # instead of \ to clearly illustrate that the last item is not
a markup function, but it could (should) be otherwise.

Would you agree with such a solution? (Regardless of how we implement it.)

V.

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

Re: Slightly off-topic

[Valentin Villenave]

On 3/21/19, Ralph Palmer  wrote:
> I'm a long-time and dedicated LilyPond/Frescobaldi user. I would like to
> help some Spanish-speaking people get started with LilyPond and
> Frescobaldi. I can access the Spanish language LilyPond sites, but I can't
> find a URL for the Frescobaldi Spanish site or a Spanish language user's
> mailing list. Can anyone help? I can't even find the Frescobaldi English
> site anymore!

Hey Ralph,
indeed, frescobaldi.org appears to be down (or its hosting not to have
been resubscribed to on time). Fortunately binaries are still
available on https://github.com/frescobaldi/frescobaldi/releases

With regard to Spanish-speaking users who may have questions, I think
the best is to direct them to lilypond-es. We welcome
Frescobaldi-related questions on lilypond-user-fr, it’s possible that
things are similar on -es. Paco may have additional thoughts, though.

Cheers,
V.

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

Re: Google

[Aaron Hill]

On 2019-03-21 11:21 pm, Robert Schmaus wrote:

Nice font though ... does anyone know which one this is?


For the notation, it looks to be hand-drawn specifically for the Doodle. 
 At the very least, there is no actual font being loaded for the 
notation.  All of the graphics are here:


https://www.google.com/logos/2018/bach/r2/main-sprite.png

What surprised me was that the double sharp and double flat are in 
there.  It turns out that when you activate advanced mode, you can 
switch into keys with sharps or flats and then apply a suitable double 
accidental.  Nice attention to detail.


--

As for the fonts that *are* being loaded:

Germania One - https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Germania+One
Noto Sans - https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Noto+Sans
Noto Serif - https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Noto+Serif


-- Aaron Hill

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

Re: Google

[Robert Schmaus]

Nice font though ... does anyone know which one this is?



> On 22 Mar 2019, at 04:30, Guy Stalnaker  wrote:
> 
> Wow! None of the dozen or so I did looked anything like that!
> 
> -- 
> 
> “Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of 
> human existence.”
> 
> ― Aristotle
> 
>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019, 8:55 PM Aaron Hill  wrote:
>> On 2019-03-21 6:23 pm, madMuze wrote:
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Not sure which chorale gave it the idea for all those parallel ninths.
>> > 
>> > Should I be worried about my career?
>> 
>> Parallels notwithstanding, the AI is certainly zealous with the 
>> ambituses.
>> 
>> 
>> -- Aaron Hill
>> 
>> ___
>> 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
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user