[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
lily-0e752a19.ly
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
then.
--
Best regards
Thomas Spuhler
All of my e-mails have a valid digital signature
ID 60114E63
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- 2.19.22 not building, Thomas Spuhler, 2015/07/09
- Re: 2.19.22 not building, David Kastrup, 2015/07/09
- Re: 2.19.22 not building, Thomas Spuhler, 2015/07/09
- Re: 2.19.22 not building, David Kastrup, 2015/07/09
- Re: 2.19.22 not building, Thomas Spuhler, 2015/07/09
- Re: 2.19.22 not building, David Kastrup, 2015/07/09
- Re: 2.19.22 not building, Thomas Spuhler, 2015/07/09
- Re: 2.19.22 not building, David Kastrup, 2015/07/09
- Re: 2.19.22 not building,
Thomas Spuhler <=
- Re: 2.19.22 not building, David Kastrup, 2015/07/13