[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2
From: |
Jonas Hahnfeld |
Subject: |
Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2 |
Date: |
Thu, 09 Dec 2021 08:30:58 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Evolution 3.42.1 |
Am Mittwoch, dem 08.12.2021 um 16:44 -0800 schrieb Aaron Hill:
> On 2021-12-08 12:51 pm, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> > Okay, now it's getting interesting. Can you give the following archive
> > a try? (also CC'ing the other people who reported problems on Windows)
> > https://cloud.hahnjo.de/index.php/s/yMx3nWMCPNLngAq
> > It's the same binaries, but the lib/ folder with the compiled .go files
> > added to the archive after the share/ folder, so programs are going to
> > extract it last.
>
> Order of extraction should be irrelevant. It is not the file creation
> time that matters but its modified time. And I would expect archive
> utilities to set the modified time to match the original file.
You'd be surprised what Windows does and does not do when extracting an
archive. At least when I was creating the archive with the command line
'zip' on Linux and used "Extract All..." in the Windows Explorer, it
made a difference in which order I added files.
> Ultimately, this new archive did not change behavior on my system. Even
> manually touching all .go files to ensure they are definitely "newer"
> than all the associated .scm files made no difference.
>
> I renamed the ccache folder to test on-the-fly compilation in case the
> problem is due to a bug in the byte-compiled files. With that, I am
> getting no further than:
>
> ====
> [C:/Tools/lilypond-2.23.5/share/lilypond/2.23.5/scm/lily/define-woodwind-diagrams.scmBacktrace:
> 4 (apply-smob/1 #<catch-closure 3368760>)
> 3 (primitive-eval (for-each ly:load init-scheme-files))
> 2 (primitive-load-path "lily/define-woodwind-diagrams")
> 1 (primitive-eval (define bassoon-rh-f-key-stencil (# …)))
> 0 (apply-smob/1 #<boot-closure 46ff940 (_ . _)> # #f "Wr…"
> …)
>
> ERROR: In procedure apply-smob/1:
> Wrong number of arguments to #<boot-closure 58979e0 (_ . _)>
> ====
Yes, because you cannot use Guile without having byte-compiled files
for the most critical .scm files.
Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Re: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, (continued)
- Re: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Robin Bannister, 2021/12/05
- Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Petr Pařízek, 2021/12/07
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Jonas Hahnfeld, 2021/12/07
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Petr Pařízek, 2021/12/07
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Karlin High, 2021/12/07
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Petr Pařízek, 2021/12/08
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Michael Käppler, 2021/12/08
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Jonas Hahnfeld, 2021/12/08
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Robin Bannister, 2021/12/08
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Aaron Hill, 2021/12/08
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2,
Jonas Hahnfeld <=
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Aaron Hill, 2021/12/09
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Petr Pařízek, 2021/12/08
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Aaron Hill, 2021/12/09
- Re: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Petr Pařízek, 2021/12/09
- Re: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Aaron Hill, 2021/12/09
- Re: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Petr Pařízek, 2021/12/09
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Jonas Hahnfeld, 2021/12/13
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Jonas Hahnfeld, 2021/12/15
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Michael Käppler, 2021/12/15
- Re: Fwd: Binaries of LilyPond 2.23.5 with Guile 2.2, Michael Käppler, 2021/12/17