Re: lilypondbood package useful?

[Francisco Vila]

2013/1/16 Kevin Patrick Barry <address@hidden>:
> It generates a lot of extra files and folders that create clutter if you
> don't direct its output to a separate folder, but when I do that, links to
> other files (graphics for example) in the .tex file no longer work since
> it's in a different folder now (I keep all linked files in the same folder
> as the .tex file because it's on Dropbox and the full path to it is
> different on different computers).

I use lilypond-book a lot and this problem is solved if you build your
document using make or a bash script that does all the work. The
script can create an out/ folder if it doesn't exist, tell
lilypond-book to output all to out/, copy all needed files to out/,
run latex inside out/ and copy the resulting PDF back to your source
directory. You need to write a list of copy-needing files in the
makefile/script, but then all reduces to <uparrow><enter> to launch
latest command in history of terminal.

Especially if you have many short snippets and/or want your code to ve
verbatim visible. And there is no better way if you want to modify a
snippet by _only_ modifying its lilypond code, in a single place, and
you want everything else to be made automatically.  Also, look at our
manuals: they just could not be made by another method, in my opinion.

For openoffice/libreoffice users, the ooo-lilypond extension is also
better than inserting images by hand. See

  http://vimeo.com/39419265 (duration: 1 min)

 and

  http://vimeo.com/39419266 (duration: 20 sec)
-- 
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com