[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: 2.19.22 not building

From: Thomas Spuhler
Subject: Re: 2.19.22 not building
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 20:07:44 -0700
User-agent: KMail/4.12.5 (Linux/3.14.43-server-1.mga4; KDE/4.12.5; x86_64; ; )

On Friday, July 10, 2015 02:38:14 AM David Kastrup wrote:
> Thomas Spuhler <address@hidden> writes:
> > On Friday, July 10, 2015 01:43:22 AM David Kastrup wrote:
> >> Unmodified LilyPond should not even start up due to encoding
> >> problems.  This may depend on the actual version of GUILE 2.x
> >> however.
> > 
> > I converted about 10 .ly files to pdf using the regression files from
> > the WEB site and the pdf's look
> > OK.
> > This is from a lilypond-2.19.21 build
> > 
> > This is what's installed on the build box and run box
> > 
> > $ rpm -qa |grep guil
> > lib64guilereadline18_18-2.0.9-5.mga5
> > guile-2.0.9-5.mga5
> > lib64guile-devel-2.0.9-5.mga5
> > guile-runtime-2.0.9-5.mga5
> > lib64guile2.0_22-2.0.9-5.mga5
> 2.0.9 is probably the last version without the encoding problems.  See
> <URL:http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20109>.  That there
> has been a change is not acknowledged.  The suggested workaround (using
> binary string ports) fails through bugs of its own, see
> <URL:http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20302>.
> At any rate, there has not been any version that has made it even
> partway through the regression tests on my computer (several
> memory-management related fixes, see
> <URL:http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=19883>, have gone in
> after GUILE was "upgraded" to 2.0.11).  So you are likely in possession
> of the most-working-ever copy using GUILE 2.0.  Meaning it is totally
> untested and unsupported, with the developers being quite unable to get
> as far as you.  And you will stop being able to get it to work once you
> upgrade GUILE to the "stable" 2.0.11 version.
> If you have serious system programmer chops at your disposal, feel free
> to set them on figuring out the 2.0.9/2.0.11 difference and further
> working on migrating LilyPond at the upstream project.
> But for packaging, GUILE 2.0 is definitely the wrong choice at the
> current point of time.

I am coming back to Guile-2. I upgraded to vers 2.0.11 and rebuild lily 
2.19.21. I still cannot 
build 2.19.22. It chokes at the documentation.

Well, Guile-2.0.11 certainly has some problems like this:
ldconfig: /lib64/libguile-2.0.so.22.7.2-gdb.scm is not an ELF file - it has the 
wrong magic bytes at 
the start. But I probably can work with upstream to resolve it.

But lilypond 2.19.21 (built with guile-2.0.11) compiles the testfile 
looks good, no crash, nothing special

I am going to continue building it with guile-2.0.11 for the time being. It 
will take about 12 month 
until we release our new distro version and I can always go back to guile1.8 if 
we still have it by 

Best regards
Thomas Spuhler

All of my e-mails have a valid digital signature
ID 60114E63

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

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