[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Doc split: "program usage"

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: Doc split: "program usage"
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:06:39 -0700
User-agent: Thunderbird (Macintosh/20070509)

John Mandereau wrote:
Le jeudi 26 juillet 2007 à 22:41 -0700, Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit :
Sounds good, but I'd leave out the INSTALL docs. We haven't looked at
this for a long time.  People should get the gub builds or take the
lilypond  that comse with their distro.

This is the driving force behind this rearrangement (and rewriting of INSTALL): I can really emphasize the binaries.

Right, but what about developers or contributors who need to compile?
INSTALL is still valuable to me.  The only problem is, INSTALL may not
list possible bugs or problems with recent configurations (64 bits
boxes, ...).

This is also true. I recall that Erik posted a long email about how to compile gub from darcs (or something like that); I might like to have a look at compiling lilypond once I have a linux box (and thus not depend on the binaries all the time)... and some doc/translators might really appreciate knowing the "make EXTERNAL_BINARY" trick.

- Graham

reply via email to

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