[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Documentation suggestion: Including LilyPond files

From: Urs Liska
Subject: Re: Documentation suggestion: Including LilyPond files
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 01:38:24 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1

Am 22.05.2012 01:15, schrieb Colin Hall:
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 11:07:05PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
I think I stumbled over a bit of misleading or wrong information in the NR.
I agree. I had a look and found issue 391 entitled "using relative filepath in \include 


It looks like this was fixed in 2009 and released in the 2.12.x series.
Ah, that might explain something.
I somehow was convinced that it isn't possible to reference include files this way and was therefore quite surprised to see that it actually is ...

Please have a look at the following documentation suggestion and
incorporate it into the NR if you find it correct:
I haven't tested it but going by the issue tracker your suggestion
makes sense. Thanks very much for doing a thorough job.
I forgot to mention that I _have_ tested the following:
main file includes "sub1/includeOne.ily"
includeOne.ily contains the include-relative directive and includes "sub2/includeTwo.ily" (which is "sub1/sub2/includeTwo.ily" relative to the main input file.


See new documentation tracker:


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]