[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lilybuntu confusion
From: |
Carl D. Sorensen |
Subject: |
Re: lilybuntu confusion |
Date: |
Fri, 3 Jul 2009 13:06:50 -0600 |
On 7/3/09 1:02 PM, "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 12:41:32PM -0500, Jonathan Kulp wrote:
>> Graham Percival wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 10:50:07PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>>> Does this still compile the lilypond examples? That would take
>>> take much longer than 10-30 seconds.
>>
>> I'm able to copy to different location and compile certain files by
>> themselves as long as they don't require a bunch of @include files. They
>> compile very quickly this way. I wonder if it might help to define some
>> new Make targets. For example "make lilypond-learning.pdf" would only
>> compile the LM, and I would assume save quite a bit of time in compiling
>> over "make doc".
>
> I was already planning on splitting the docs into
> Documentation/learning, Documentation/notation, etc., so that
> would implicitly do this anyway. :)
I thought you were planning on making it
documentation/learning
(i.e, eliminating the D).
Carl
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, (continued)
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Mark Polesky, 2009/07/01
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Jonathan Kulp, 2009/07/01
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Carl D. Sorensen, 2009/07/01
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, ArnoWaschk, 2009/07/01
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Jonathan Kulp, 2009/07/01
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Graham Percival, 2009/07/01
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Trevor Daniels, 2009/07/01
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Graham Percival, 2009/07/02
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Jonathan Kulp, 2009/07/03
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Graham Percival, 2009/07/03
- Re: lilybuntu confusion,
Carl D. Sorensen <=
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Graham Percival, 2009/07/03
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Trevor Daniels, 2009/07/03
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Trevor Daniels, 2009/07/03
- Re: lilybuntu confusion, Jonathan Kulp, 2009/07/01