[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: HOWTO: lilypond-1.3.98 on windows32

From: janneke
Subject: Re: HOWTO: lilypond-1.3.98 on windows32
Date: 26 Oct 2000 10:25:18 +0200

"James Hammons" <address@hidden> writes:

> The short answer to this is yes:  Look at JBR's Windows install program.  A
> well written installer would be able to reconcile paths, write batch files,
> etc., but unfortunately I don't have access to one.

Well, you have access to the cygwin installer?  I had a look at it,
but decided not do make the effort of adding or adapting it for
lilypond.  It's in the cygwin cvs tree.

> monkey wrench into the works.  In the meantime, however, I can test/correct
> your scripts for efficacy if you'd like...

That would be fine.  A few checks could make these scripts a lot more
robust, and they'd serve as a magnificent documentation: use the
scripts or fix it yourself.  (Ok, maybe not magnificent, but it seems
the best we can offer without devoting too much time).

> echo "Please add /Cygwin/usr/lilypond-1.3.$patchlevel/bin to your path"
> Using this route you can't have multiple versions be usable at the same
> time.  That's why I use a batch file which adds the path to a different
> version of lily on the fly.  Other than that it's an OK setup (but certainly
> not optimal--at least not on a Windows box IMO).

Ok is good enough for me, any volunteers may improve on it :-)

> I think you misunderstood me.  I run lily from a DOS box, and use a batch
> file to set up paths/environmental variables in order to use a certain
> version of lilypond (this avoids the above mentioned problem).  Using a
> batch file to actually *run* lilypond from Windows would be insane!

Still, learing a bit about bash, and running that iso a plain dos box
gives you so much more power and convenience.  If only for tab
completion of paths, command history, tracing...

> Well, you might "get it" if you had to work & develop all day on one.  ;-)

And then again, I might not.  Two years ago, I started a part-time job
in a windows shop, thinking I'd be able to handle it, trying to
approch it rationally.  But after a couple of months, I realised that
having to use windows all morning made me very restless and was bad
for my mood.

> I was going to volunteer to make a compact lilypond install for win32, but I
> just don't have the time to support such a thing

That's our concern too.  I'd rather be working on Lily, than helping
windows users debugging their installation in their pet-place.

> Unix box is beautiful but Unix grafted on to Windows is an ugly thing (I
> certainly wouldn't trade the Slackware UMSDOS install that I have for
> Cygwin!).

That's why we had discussions before, and that's why Han-Wen proposed
to reconsider distributing windows binaries.  Linux is much better
suited, easier, and more fun for running LilyPond.  Especially for

> I'll give it a shot.  But I still think that giving advanced users the
> option of installing without Cygwin is a good idea.  Just say that it's
> unsupported and if they have troubles with it, install the way that you
> suggest.

We can distribute the collection of scripts in a and maybe
also have an  The toplevel entry into the
could be a batch file that states something like: ``install cygwin or be
on your own.  See readme.text''

> I still don't care much for Cygwin, but I *love* that Cygwin1.dll!  ;-p

Well, Cygwin makes me compile windows binaries on my linux box.  I
like that ;-)


Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter       |

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]