[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution
From: |
Thomas Morley |
Subject: |
Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution |
Date: |
Tue, 28 Feb 2012 01:07:30 +0100 |
Hi Phil,
2012/2/27 Phil Holmes <address@hidden>:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Morley"
> <address@hidden>
> To: "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>
> Cc: "lilypond-user" <address@hidden>
> Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012 10:30 PM
> Subject: Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution
>
>
>
> Hi Phil,
>
> this step from CG 7.7 Updating LSR to a new version
> "2. Copy relevant snippets (i.e., snippets whose version is equal to
> or less than the new version of LilyPond) from
> ‘Documentation/snippets/new/’ into the tarball."
> is outstanding.
> I don't know how to extract them other than manually and this would be
> worse. How to do?
>
> Best,
> Harm
>
> ==============================================
>
> Have you got them from the source tarball?
>
>
> --
> Phil Holmes
>
>
>
got them. (Please hold in mind that I don't compile lilypond myself,
so I had to look around. Found it on
http://lilypond.org/development.html - Source:
lilypond-2.15.30.tar.gz. Might be worth a new doc-addition)
But there is a not compiling file in it!
woodwind-diagrams-key-lists.ly gives:
woodwind-diagrams-key-lists.ly:16:1: error: GUILE signaled an error
for the expression beginning here
#
(print-keys-verbose 'piccolo (current-error-port))
Wrong number of arguments to #<procedure print-keys-verbose (instrument)>
etc.
Well, the description says: "The list will be displayed
in the log file, but not in the music. If output to the console
is wanted, omit the @code{(current-error-port)} from the commands."
and it works when omitting (current-error-port) but I don't know what
to do else!
File attached.
Cheers,
Harm
woodwind-diagrams-key-lists.ly
Description: Text Data
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, (continued)
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, David Nalesnik, 2012/02/25
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Phil Hézaine, 2012/02/25
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/26
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/26
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, David Nalesnik, 2012/02/26
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/26
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, David Nalesnik, 2012/02/26
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/26
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/26
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Phil Holmes, 2012/02/27
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution,
Thomas Morley <=
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/27
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/28
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Phil Holmes, 2012/02/29
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/29
- Message not available
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, David Nalesnik, 2012/02/26
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/27
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/25
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/25
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/25
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, David Kastrup, 2012/02/23