Re: install frescoba 2.18.2 in Ubuntu

[Urs Liska]

Am 03.03.2016 um 12:33 schrieb Bernard:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for your, and also others, replies Lilypond and Frescbaldi
> works for me now, but this effort of you and others is meant to let
> Frescobadi and Lilypond be installed easily for everybody. I feel this
> effort is good. And I would like to help.
>
> Lets go one step back. The mail is about dependencies. Software X,
> with version Y should work. Should work; a tricky statement. A lot of
> discussions are communicating about versions, and installations steps
> and results on that steps. The knowledge is with you all, but how to
> easily communicate this knowledge with beginners using Lilypond and
> Frescobaldi. How do you know precise what the status is of the
> computer of the person who asked the question?
>
> Let me make a summery of my knowledge, please correct me I am wrong.
> As far as I can tell Lilypond can be installed without Frescobaldi,
> and does not require Frescobadli to be used. 

Correct.

> Frescobaldi can be installed without Lilypond, but will have less, or
> no value if there is no Lilypond version installed. 

Correct.

> The Lilypond version 2.18.2 and Frescobaldi version 2.18.2 has no
> direct relation with each other. 

Yes, it's a mere coincidence that they *right now* happen to be the same.

> Lilypond has no dependency with Frescobaldi. 

Yes.

> Frescobaldi has no (technical or installation) dependency with
> Lilypond, but it has a functional dependency with Lilypond.

Yes. Frescobaldi is one possible "frontend" for LilyPond.


>
> Installation troubles is not unique to Lilypond and frustrates me. I
> do not want to check my self what my system resources are in detail.
> And have to find a way to retrieve those resources. On the other hand,
> you should not spend valuable time to figure out what resources a user
> has. Just compare your installation with there installation and it
> must (not should) work. Of course systems are never equal, that make
> comparing more complicated. But also more attractive to be automated.

The LilyPond installation is really trouble-less, and I have the feeling
that all the confusion came up because someone mixed LilyPond and
Frescobaldi.

If you don't want to install LilyPond using apt-get (for example because
you are recommended to use a newer version) you can simply download the
installation script and run it using "sh path/to/downloaded/script.sh".
This will install LilyPond locally in your user account. There are no
further dependencies or the need of administrator rights.
The only thing that *may* be needed is to add the ~/bin directory to
your $PATH.

>
> I am a Python programmer and already thinking about these problems a
> lot. I might develop an open source program to do that. If the
> resources check will be Ok Lilypond always can be installed according
> to the instruction. So not should, but is. Of course first knowledge
> has to be gathered of knowledgeable people like you to say in detail
> what is required. 

As said, for installing LilyPond there are no further requirements.

> And user will execute that test, and it might be that sometimes a
> specific configuration still does not work. This info will be added,
> so the test will be more accurate, using all the info users might share.
> In short the output should be falsifiability (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability ). "Should work" is not
> falsifiable. "Does work" is.
>
> This is a lot of work, first because the program itself should have
> none or as less as possible dependencies itself. Second the user
> interfaces should very user friendly.
>
> Is there interest for such a support program for Lilypond and
> Frescobaldi?

You should definitely get in touch with Sharon Rosner (also on this
list) because he has done a lot in that direction recently (at least for
LilyPond).

Best
Urs

>
> With regards,
>
> Bernard
>
> On 03-03-16 06:40, David Wright wrote:
>> On Sun 28 Feb 2016 at 08:29:52 (+0100), Bernard wrote:
>>> Hi Noeck,
>>>
>>> Second reply, I was not reading to careful.
>>>
>>> http://lilypond.org/unix.html before? There is a small "Install"
>>> section. What was missing for you?
>>>
>>> Yes I saw that, but it was missing install from shell. I really
>>> prefer using apt-get because I have bad experience  with download
>>> and install because of the depencies hell.
>>> So the message should be "do not us use apt-get because you will
>>> retrieve probably version 2.16.2"
>>> But even better, use a apt-get ppa repository, this you keep u to
>>> date your self, without being dependant of Debian.
>> I'm not sure what Debian has to do with all this. I thought you were
>> using ubuntu (in the subject line).
>>
>> The current (jessie/stable) version of LilyPond (LP) is 2.18.2.
>> The current (jessie/stable) version of Frescobaldi (F) is 2.0.13.
>>
>> AIUI there is no LP version dependency of Debian's F 2.0.13:
>> Depends: python (>= 2.7), python (<< 2.8), lilypond,
>> python-poppler-qt4, python-qt4, python-pypm, tango-icon-theme
>>
>> I have tried out Debian's F with lilypond.org's LP 2.19.36 with no
>> problems AFAICT.
>>
>>> Like : https://launchpad.net/~frescobaldi/+archive/ubuntu/ppa (but
>>> the status is unknown, and out of date)
>>>
>>> This info is inconsistent with the Frescobaldi info, and my
>>> assumption was Frescobaldi was correct. Which was wrong.
>>>
>>> - Should it mention the --prefix option?
>>>
>>> It would help, for me that was not crucial.
>>>
>>> - Should it mention that you can have several versions installed in
>>>    parallel?
>>>
>>> Yes it sure does. Because I had version 2.16.2 was installed and
>>> Frescobaldi urge to uninstall previous version of python-ly because
>>> it can cause inconsistency. Unfortunately I can not recall where I
>>> found that info.
>> This is presumably F-speak. AFAIK Debian has only packaged this as
>> python3-ly and it's not in jessie/stable. This may be why the latter's
>> version of F is old.
>>
>>> - Was only the Frescobaldi settings part new to you? Should it be
>>>    mentioned?
>>>
>>> Yes it would. Installing Frescobaldi does install Lilypond, which is
>>> very convenient, if it was the correct Lilypond version.
>>> Frescobaldi should mention only the old version is installed, and go
>>> the the Lilypond website for info how to install Lilypond 2.18.2.
>> It's not clear to me what is meant by "correct LP version" or
>> "Frescobaldi should mention...". Earlier in the thread, Joram points
>> to http://lilypond.org/unix.html and implies that he has something to
>> do with its maintenance. (See below.) But that's for LP. There's also
>> http://frescobaldi.org/download which has instructions about
>> installing F's dependencies. Is that the page you wish to improve?
>> If so, you have to bear in mind that people's idea of "correct LP
>> version" could vary widely.
>>
>> On that page, there is a link to http://frescobaldi.org/links#distros
>> which seems to be very out of date. For example it mentions
>> Debian "testing" with a link to
>> http://packages.debian.org/nl/squeeze/editors/frescobaldi
>> That's about six years or three distributions out of date.
>>
>> I can't find any statement that says you don't need a specific version
>> of LP to install with a given version of F. It just so happens that at
>> the moment the stable version of LP (2.18.2) is the same as the
>> stable version of F (2.18.2 since December 26th, 2015). Perhaps
>> this is all the more reason to point out that LP from 2.16 to 2.19
>> will all run with F 2.18.2 (and older versions too).
>>
>>> On 27-02-16 19:11, Noeck wrote:
>>>> Hi Bernard,
>>>>
>>>> Am 27.02.2016 um 18:54 schrieb Bernard:
>>>>> Wow, Joram. Thank you very much. Did this work.
>>>> Glad it helped you.
>>>>
>>>>> Update the installation documentation with your info would help
>>>>> very much.
>>>> There was a similar question just a few days ago, so I take this
>>>> request
>>>> for improvement seriously. Did you find the Linux download page
>>>> http://lilypond.org/unix.html before? There is a small "Install"
>>>> section. What was missing for you?
>>>>
>>>> - Should it mention the --prefix option?
>>>> - Should it mention that you can have several versions installed in
>>>>    parallel?
>>>> - Was only the Frescobaldi settings part new to you? Should it be
>>>>    mentioned?
>> Cheers,
>> David.
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user