Re: Lilypond-book

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Am Sonntag, dem 20.03.2022 um 21:33 +0100 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
> Le 20/03/2022 à 20:34, Martín Rincón Botero a écrit :
> > Hi Jean,
> > 
> > I'm on Ubuntu 20.04. It seems the printing code that we added to 
> > book_latex.py is returning an empty string. Here's the new logging 
> > output of lilypond-book:
> > 
> > lilypond-book (GNU LilyPond) 2.22.1
> > Reading `/home/martin/Escritorio/newfile1.tex'
> > Running `pdflatex' on file `/tmp/tmp0i00kf9b.tex' to detect default 
> > page settings.
> > 
> > lilypond-book: warning: Unable to auto-detect default settings:
> > pdflatex: /home/martin/lilypond/usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version 
> > `CXXABI_1.3.9' not found (required by pdflatex)
> > pdflatex: /home/martin/lilypond/usr/lib/libz.so.1: no version 
> > information available (required by /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpng16.so.16)
> > pdflatex: /home/martin/lilypond/usr/lib/libz.so.1: no version 
> > information available (required by /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpng16.so.16)
> 
> 
> 
> Aaah, *that* is the interesting piece of information from the
> start. But -- OMG, I can reproduce it on my own installation.
> I hadn't even imaged it would be broken for me. Is lilypond-book
> actually working for anyone on Linux??

To be fair, only the official binaries and only since the libraries
require version information (not sure when that is). It could be that
many lilypond-book users actually rely on the distro-provided LilyPond.
Also it should only affect PDF-related formats, so for example not
HTML, and I don't understand what the actual implication is (probably
because I don't use lilypond-book myself.)

> At any rate, it seems like it's an issue with the way the
> lilypond-book shell wrapper created by GUB sets LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
> I have no time to investigate what it should do, but the problem
> should go away by installing LilyPond 2.23.6 from
> https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/releases/release%252F2.23.6-1
> since the new infrastructure creating binaries no longer
> does that. For me, that works.

Yes, this is one of the problems about LD_LIBRARY_PATH and why we will
go for full static builds.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part