Re: mac osx terminal instructions

[James Lowe]

Hello,

Hans Aberg wrote:
> On 7 Mar 2010, at 08:12, James Bailey wrote:
>
> > Currently, the instructions on getting LilyPond up and running in a 
> > terminal on mac osx have the user create a script which calls the 
> > lilypond application, and then add the location of the script to the 
> > $PATH. Is there any advantage of this over just having the user add 
> > the location of the lilypond binary to the $PATH?
>
> They are different: LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/ has other stuff 
> in it than just the lilypond programs, for example ps2pdf. If one adds 
> this location to the environment variable PATH, one must decide which 
> version of these to call. 

From a user's point of view why is it done like this? Why have two 
'bin' locations and not just put it all in

LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/


> But one could add /usr/local/bin/ before the 
> Lilypond directory. In addition, I have paths to MacPorts /opt/, Fink 
> /sw/, and TeX-Live /usr/local/texlive/ TeX.

After my problems with getting Mac OS to work in Terminal (I just needed 
to RTFM) I noticed that I had a .profile in my own account, now I know 
that default users (admin or otherwise) do not have a .profile so I must 
have created it and when I looked at it I noticed that I HAD RTFM'd the 
manual because there was a 
/Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/ but no

"$@" at the end.

which is why I could run the command but probably why I got a segfault 
when running it explicitly and as if no file was put as the argument 
without the explicit path (when I had my ~/bin set).

however I noticed that when I did an echo $PATH to see if what I had 
done was working, I noticed that I had a path to Macports. Now I KNOW 
that I wouldn't have added that, so I wondered as the installer is just 
a zip file where we drag and drop the .app to the location we want it if 
LilyPond adds any $PATH statement when we run it for the first time?

James