|
From: | Bernard |
Subject: | Re: install frescoba 2.18.2 in Ubuntu |
Date: | Fri, 04 Mar 2016 10:05:27 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 |
Hi Jordan and David Wrigth,Let me tell thank I am confused on what is being said, who has which point of view. I could start research in this thread but I would be very time consuming, and even then the value of the result is limited. I get the impression I am not the only one who is confused. And for your info, for me everything is already solved a long time ago, this discussion what to do for future new users of Frescobaldi and Lilypond.
What remains for me: A complete installation guide covering up-to-date versions of both Frescobaldi and Lilypond would be helpful (cf. PS). This is a quote of Noeck / Joram
That is not what I wanted to do. I just want a measure system so it is total clear what we talk about. To reduce the confusion, which is partly created only because the length of the thread.
Indeed, that makes it complex. In the end system X does work and system Y does not work. This can be compared for differences. With one call. The expert, you, reads this report and suggest a changes, and execute this one call again. To verify if the change was effective. Until there is working system, or except that just a specific environment f.e. OpenBSD with a specific installation , installation is not possible. That is also important knowledge, no need to try something if you know It can not work.Yes, but whose installation do you compare it with? Me, running Debian's F 2.0.13 on Debian's LP 2.18.2 and lilypond's LP 2.19.36 with python-ly installed from Debian's testing distribution? Or someone else running openSUSE with a different mix? This is a quote of David Wrigth
Yes but also lighter. There might be suggestions who both work. On with more rights and one with limited rights. Then you can choose the one with the most limited rights for security. I have seen a suggestion for helpYour enemy puts cp somewhere like /tmp/cp, makes it world-executable, then waits for someone to cd /tmp and copy some files. This is a quote of David Wrigth
Looks reasonable. It might work, and the advice was written with all the positive and constructive intention.It's likely installed where you told the installer to install it, but is not in your PATH variable. Try setting up your PATH appropriately in your ~/.bashrc or whatever startup file may be relevant for your system.
But I found the thread : "Login failure after editing ".bashrc" and ".profile" " see :http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2190876
Following this advices would cause an additional risk for me. Later I got a less drastic intervention advice. Which I followed with success.
So if two solutions are possible, Two different measurements of systems who both work, the choose the least demanding one. When comparing systems configurations this can be done.
I repeat :
What remains for me: A complete installation guide covering up-to-date
My suggestion would be to : 1) First check if the resources for installation are available2) Complete installation (guide) This could be limited, because the precondition are met before execution.
3) Check if installation was successful , f.e. executing a unit-test.All these 3 steps could be combined in one. But the first step should also be executed separately to find a specific condition which requires help of experts, of you.
For me there is doubt. I do realize developing such measuring system is complex. And time consuming to build. And I doubt how much need there is for a short falsifiable report which compares two systems.
I have no idea of how many installations of Lilypond and Frescobaldi there are each month, and how much of them do fail, if this can be measured. If this number is limited, it is much better to continue how you did it until now.
With regards, Bernard On 03-03-16 22:26, Noeck wrote:
Hi Bernardhttp://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.Generally speaking, yes. But I never had problems with the lilypond shell installer. I agree an up-to-date ppa would be an interesting option for Ubuntu users. (I use one for other software.) But as always, someone would have to do it and look after it.So the message should be "do not us use apt-get because you will retrieve probably version 2.16.2"No, because a) there is nothing wrong with getting 2.16 b) you can still add newer versions, c) which version you get depends on your distribution. Ubuntu 14.04 is almost 2 years old, so yes the packaged software is old, too. For instance, Ubuntu 15.10 contains LP 2.18.2.- 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 very unclear. Frescobaldi versions depend on versions of python-ly. But neither the version number of Frescobaldi nor the version number of python-ly are related to the version of lilypond. So, as I mentioned you can just install Frescobaldi from the package repositories and it should come with the correct python-ly. python-ly is not lilypond.- 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.There is nothing wrong with this Lilypond version. It is just older than necessary. In principle you can use any LP version with any Frescobaldi 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.The Frescobaldi version in Ubuntu is not new either so why should it know about newer Lilypond versions? It just uses what you provide.Earlier in the thread, Joram points to http://lilypond.org/unix.html and implies that he has something to do with its maintenance. (See below.)Not really. I am familiar enough with some maintainers and developers, that I dare to say that good suggestions on how to improve the documentation have chances to get in there. I could propose a patch if we find sensible improvements to the documentation. But so far this discussion produced more confusion than tangible proposals – at least from what I understood. What remains for me: A complete installation guide covering up-to-date versions of both Frescobaldi and Lilypond would be helpful (cf. PS). Cheers, Joram PS: I know that the following statement will not reach consensus here, so I am not sure if it makes sense to write it. But privately, this is how I see it: Most (new) users are probably not used to understand how different components of their software is related, they view it as one single system. E.g. Sibelius is the program to create, view, edit, print sib files. For non-programmers it needs some insights that Frescobaldi (GUI and IDE) is separated from Lilypond ("engine"). This is why when talking about Lilypond I sell it as Frescobaldi and only mention later that using other editors and pdf viewers is possible. Choice is good, clear recommendations are even more important for newcomers. IMHO.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |