Re: another 'wrong type argument' error

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

On Mon, 2022-10-17 at 20:11 +0100, Alex Harker wrote:
> Thanks for clarifying what would be helpful. I’m currently trying to
> get lilypond building locally with these scripts, although I’ve not
> managed to fully complete that process yet.
> 
> The dependencies were pretty much fine, but I had a 404 with zlib
> whilst downloading the source and had to move to the next version to
> get rid of that.

Sigh, the old zlib-1.2.12.tar.xz got moved away due to the fixed CVE. I
guess we'll need to update to 1.2.12 before the weekend then...

> I also managed to build the dependencies with a lower Mac OS
> requirement than the machine I was building on with very little in
> the way of added python code.

As I said, I still don't think this is the right way to go. The minimum
version is chosen for an objective reason (everything older is EOL by
Apple).

> When building lilypond I hit an issue with some old/partial version
> of harfbuzz in usr/local/ which I removed.
> Then I hit an error compiling the lexer, which as of yet I’ve not
> been able to trace.
> 
> I realise that the first priority is probably testing, but I’d like
> to be able to build as I feel I might be able to be more useful in
> that case. I also understand the fear about things breaking out of
> the blue, but for MacOS dev my experience is that if support for old
> Ones became an issue that’s more likely to be a compile-time, rather
> than a runtime issue.
> 
> In terms of testing - are there tests that would be good to run, or
> is the required testing more general (e.g. - it runs on an arbitrary
> lilypond score file).
> 
> In terms of Lilypond.app - I suspect this would be useful to maintain
> - it’s how I was using it until my latest system (at which point I
> moved to Frescobaldi to have a GUI - that’s a much nicer
> environment). I think the majority of Mac users wouldn’t be
> comfortable with a command-line interface, or having to deal with a
> separate GUI/environment to be installed onto. Thus, from my view
> this is about new adopters - getting people to try Lilypond in the
> first place.
> 
> I saw a branch that looked like it might be the old Mac app - I’d be
> happy to take a look once I can get lilypond building. Can someone
> confirm where this is? I presume the first goal would simply be to
> resurrect it as is? The packaging part is trivial - it’s the app
> itself will require more of look, but there are also tighter
> requirements in terms of code signing etc. these days in terms of
> getting around Apple’s gatekeeper and that would be something to
> think about later down the line, but only once the app was back up an
> running locally.

This was discussed before, and we *wanted* to get rid of LilyPad.
Please see Jean's answer for more details.

> Let me know also if I should continue any more technical questions
> here, or on another list.

Yes, let's stop hijacking this thread, the discussed topic has nothing
to do anymore with the original subject. Discussions like this should
happen in separate threads on lilypond-devel, not the -user list.

Jonas

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