[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Mon, 02 Aug 2021 08:35:12 +0200
Am Sonntag, dem 01.08.2021 um 20:53 +0000 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
> On 8/1/21, 10:21 AM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of Jonas Hahnfeld via
> Discussions on LilyPond development"
> <firstname.lastname@example.org on behalf of
> email@example.com> wrote:
> > For me, personally, I'd prefer to see us follow up with either Marnen's
> or Jaques's work (they may actually be very similar -- I'm not sure) so we
> can get installable .app bundles, not just installed binaries. Installable
> app bundles make it very easy to use different versions of LilyPond in
> Can you explain? Just extracting different versions of the binaries
> produced by the above system will work just fine. IIRC you only need to
> adjust the paths in Frescobaldi, right?
> I suppose that I can have different name binaries in my bin folder, with a
> different name for each version. As far as I know the binaries are generally
> installed to some folder other than Applications (I don't remember where it
> ended up when I tested it.
Ok, would be interesting to know...
> With the app bundle, I can rename the app bundle, and all of the necessary
> bin files are in each .app bundle. I don't have to worry about what is the
> appropriate system path. It's possible that it's no more difficult with your
> binaries, rather than the .app bundles. It's just not my standard process.
> GUB produces .app bundles, so that's what I'm used to using.
You should be able to unpack the binaries to different directories, and
use them in parallel as you wish.
> The other thing that I thought tha .app bundles provided is built-in proper
> versions of all the necessary utilities, so I don't need to worry about
> clashes with improper versions of utilities. I haven't actually run into any
> problems with clashes, but I also haven't tried multiple lilypond binaries
> with different names on my system -- I've just used different app bundles.
I would claim it's even less error-prone with the way I'm proposing
because everything is statically linked, so you can never run into the
problem that one version of LilyPond finds a library from another
> I'm an old dog, but not so old that I can't learn new tricks. Maybe I just
> need to learn new tricks and your method is perfectly sufficient. If so,
> please let me know.
Feel free to try the current proof-of-concept, the overall idea of the
approach has worked on all systems that I tested so far.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part