[1]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 : [2]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the status is unknown, and out of date)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 [3]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
[4]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
[5]http://frescobaldi.org/links#distros
which seems to be very out of date. For example it mentions
Debian "testing" with a link to
[6]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
[7]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
[9]https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
On 03.03.2016 18:08, David Wright wrote:
On Thu 03 Mar 2016 at 09:37:55 (+0100), Blöchl Bernhard wrote:
-------- Originalnachricht --------
Betreff: Re: install frescoba 2.18.2 in Ubuntu
Datum: 03.03.2016 09:03
Von: Blöchl Bernhard [10]<address@hidden>
An: address@hidden
The headline in the original post was not correctly positioned! The
subsequent text to it was NOT written by David Wright but lies in my
own responsibility. The headline should only referencing the
citation. Sorry for my mistake. Here the corrected version:
I did not read the complete thread and after reading the last
posting I will not do that.
I have no idea which posting you mean by "last posting". "Last"
is particularly ambiguous in English; we do not even have the
distinction in meaning made AIUI by the position of "dernier"
in French.
That is a collection of citation of
unverified storys, opinions and wishes.
... So I have no idea of what _your_ opinion refers to, which
means it's impossible to agree or disagree with you. That's why
we normally quote what we're referring to on mailing lists.
I do not understand the
central problem and how to address it to lilypond? And Frescobaldi
AFAIK is anothert development team?
I don't understand why you've written question marks here.
Are you implying that someone has stated that "you do not understand
the central problem and how to address it to lilypond" and that you
disagree with them? If so, who implied it, and where?
I can't parse the construction "And Frescobaldi as far as I know is
another development team?". If _you_ don't know what you know, how
can
anyone else?
Am 03.03.2016 06:40, schrieb David Wright:
But even better, use a apt-get ppa repository, this you keep u to
date your self, without being dependant of Debian.
For the second time, you have posted that David Wright wrote
something
that David Wright didn't. Please take more care with your postings.
The content and versions of a repository are in the responsibility
and taste of the package manager(s) and usually can not simply be
affected by the software developers, say lilypond or frescobaldi
development team. A repository is a COLLECTION of software for a
particular linux version
I agree with all that.
- you want a "repository" only contending
lilypond/frescobaldi? Who should do that?
I don't want anything; this isn't _my_ problem. There was an original
problem that "Bernard [12]<address@hidden>" was having,
coping
with mixing an ubuntu distribution with software downloaded from
elsewhere:
[13]http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-02/msg00758.html
Then there was a discussion about clarifying some instructions, but I
don't know which instructions were being discussed becaues that
wasn't
made clear with a precise reference:
[14]http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-02/msg00772.html
There followed a posting which contained "But even better, use a
apt-get ppa repository, this you keep u to date your self, without
being dependant of Debian" which is what I commented on:
[15]http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-02/msg00773.html
This posting appeared to me to be muddling up different distributions
(Debian, ubuntu), different ways of installing software (package
managers, direct installation of upstream software), software that
had
and didn't have (versioned or absolute) dependencies (lilypond,
frescobaldi, python-ly, pyqt4, pyqt5).
It did not appear to me that progress was going to be made in
clarifying instructions (whichever ones are being discussed) unless
the terms people used were better defined, and naked version numbers
were avoided particularly as the main players have identical or
closely identical version numbers at present. It's no effort to write
LP 2.18.2 or F 2.16.2.
For clarification best would be to target your problem precisely for
a simple minded reader.
Cheers,
David.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user