Re: 2.19.22 not building

[Thomas Spuhler]

On Monday, July 13, 2015 10:31:18 AM David Kastrup wrote:
> Thomas Spuhler <address@hidden> writes:
> > 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
> >> 
> >> 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.
> 
> That's more or less chance.  Neither version will pass the regtests.
> 
> > But lilypond 2.19.21 (built with guile-2.0.11) compiles the testfile
> > lily-0e752a19.ly
> > looks good, no crash, nothing special
> 
> Oh good grief.  Distributing some build of software on the rationale
> that it happens to compile some small file without crashing is not solid
> engineering.
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Self-fulfilling prophesy.  You won't have Guile 1.8 any more since you
> did not need it for building a seriously deficient version of LilyPond
> unsuitable for production use and unable to complete its regtests, and
> so the only version of LilyPond you will be able to provide will be one
> unsuitable for production use and unable to complete its regtests as you
> won't have Guile 1.8 any more by then.
> 
> Who do you think are you doing a favor by distributing a version of
> LilyPond that works only superficially?
> 
> At any rate, I refer you to the GPLv3:
> 
> [Preamble]
> 
>       For the developers' and authors' protection, the GPL clearly explains
>     that there is no warranty for this free software.  For both users' and
>     authors' sake, the GPL requires that modified versions be marked as
>     changed, so that their problems will not be attributed erroneously to
>     authors of previous versions.
> 
> [...]
> 
>   5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.
> 
>   You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to
> produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the
> terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
> 
>     a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified
>     it, and giving a relevant date.
> 
> [...]
> 
> This particularly concerns the output of lilypond --version.

Good news, version 2.19.24 is the first one that built since vers. 2.19.21
Thanks for fixing it.

-- 
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.