lyp

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

lyp

Sami Amiris
Hello esteemed members.

I am not a power-user by any stretch of the imagination, so my questions
might be a bit silly or worse. Still, I will be asking them if I don't find
them answered somewhere, hoping to not impose too much.

I recently read about a problem with Ghostscript relating to lyp.

At first I had a system version, 2.19.84, which ran fine. I installed lyp,
and wanting to take advantage of all the great stuff it allows us to have, I
uninstalled my system lilypond and re-installed it in lyp, along the all-new
stable version. I installed all packages as well. To my dismay, it did not
print at all. Searching the list, I found a similar problem in a thread
about an issue with postscript. I tried to remedy according to what I read,
it did not work. So I uninstalled the lyp-2.19.84 and reinstalled the system
2.19.84. Suddenly it can print, just like before. Of course, the
lyp-installed 2.20 still cannot.

Also, both the lyp version and the system version understand all lyp
commands ("require" etc). The system version which at the moment is the only
one to print, understands them but doesn't render them. It probably ignores
them for some reason. For example, I instruct it to print with the bravura
font, but it doesn't follow through.

Any ideas?

Thank you



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Francisco Vila
Hello Sami,

El 16/3/20 a las 18:39, Sami Amiris escribió:
> At first I had a system version, 2.19.84, which ran fine. I installed lyp,
> and wanting to take advantage of all the great stuff it allows us to have, I
> uninstalled my system lilypond and re-installed it in lyp, along the all-new
> stable version.

Let's clarify, correct me if I'm wrong

I guess you have a Linux OS.

By "System version" do you mean standard package for your distribution?

"In lyp" means in a folder with that name?

> I installed all packages as well. To my dismay, it did not
> print at all.

Here you should tell exactly which stage of the whole printing process
you reached. "Printing" is sometimes used in the manuals for "rendering"
but there are intermediate PS files which could be correct even if
latest Ghostscript command fails.

> Searching the list, I found a similar problem in a thread
> about an issue with postscript. I tried to remedy according to what I read,
> it did not work.

Please specify the issue with accompanying links and it will be easier
for everyone to help.

> So I uninstalled the lyp-2.19.84 and reinstalled the system
> 2.19.84. Suddenly it can print, just like before. Of course, the
> lyp-installed 2.20 still cannot.
>
> Also, both the lyp version and the system version understand all lyp
> commands ("require" etc).

Requisites are dependant packages? Our binary is not a package, it does
not perform automatic installation of any other packages like your
package manager does.

> The system version which at the moment is the only
> one to print, understands them but doesn't render them.

How do you know it understands them?

> It probably ignores
> them for some reason.

Do you get any messages that suggest so?

> For example, I instruct it to print with the bravura
> font, but it doesn't follow through.

Trying to render a file with an alternative font is the last thing I
would ever try before having made a simple file to work.

> Any ideas?

Strip the problem, use { b } or any other simple input. Tell me the
console output from command line run.

--
Francisco Vila, Ph.D. - Badajoz (Spain)
paconet.org , lilypond.es

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Urs Liska-3
Am Dienstag, den 17.03.2020, 13:02 +0100 schrieb Francisco Vila:

> Hello Sami,
>
> El 16/3/20 a las 18:39, Sami Amiris escribió:
> > At first I had a system version, 2.19.84, which ran fine. I
> > installed lyp,
> > and wanting to take advantage of all the great stuff it allows us
> > to have, I
> > uninstalled my system lilypond and re-installed it in lyp, along
> > the all-new
> > stable version.
>
> Let's clarify, correct me if I'm wrong
>
> I guess you have a Linux OS.
>
> By "System version" do you mean standard package for your
> distribution?
>
> "In lyp" means in a folder with that name?

"In lyp" means that he uses the "lyp" packaging tool:
http://lyp.noteflakes.com/#/

I assume this will clarify your subsequent misunderstandings of Sami's
original descriptions.

Sorry I'm not able to dive into that right now, but I wanted to clarify
that.

Urs

>
> > I installed all packages as well. To my dismay, it did not
> > print at all.
>
> Here you should tell exactly which stage of the whole printing
> process
> you reached. "Printing" is sometimes used in the manuals for
> "rendering"
> but there are intermediate PS files which could be correct even if
> latest Ghostscript command fails.
>
> > Searching the list, I found a similar problem in a thread
> > about an issue with postscript. I tried to remedy according to what
> > I read,
> > it did not work.
>
> Please specify the issue with accompanying links and it will be
> easier
> for everyone to help.
>
> > So I uninstalled the lyp-2.19.84 and reinstalled the system
> > 2.19.84. Suddenly it can print, just like before. Of course, the
> > lyp-installed 2.20 still cannot.
> >
> > Also, both the lyp version and the system version understand all
> > lyp
> > commands ("require" etc).
>
> Requisites are dependant packages? Our binary is not a package, it
> does
> not perform automatic installation of any other packages like your
> package manager does.
>
> > The system version which at the moment is the only
> > one to print, understands them but doesn't render them.
>
> How do you know it understands them?
>
> > It probably ignores
> > them for some reason.
>
> Do you get any messages that suggest so?
>
> > For example, I instruct it to print with the bravura
> > font, but it doesn't follow through.
>
> Trying to render a file with an alternative font is the last thing I
> would ever try before having made a simple file to work.
>
> > Any ideas?
>
> Strip the problem, use { b } or any other simple input. Tell me the
> console output from command line run.
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Sami Amiris
Hello, and thank you both for your replies.

Yes, it is the lyp program as described above by Mr. Urs Liska. I have a
Fedora 31 system and a Windows system as well, but right now I am using the
Fedora one. I use vim and call lilypond from the command line - the program
gives me the output logs in the terminal.

As I have installed lyp, I thought to have a \require "bravura" and a
\bravuraOn as required.

When using the lyp-installed lilypond 2.20, it fails to produce a pdf,
producing this message instead:

"
...
Converting to `experiment.pdf'...
warning: `(gs -q -dSAFER -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=595.28
-dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS=841.89 -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH
-r1200 -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dAutoRotatePages=/None -dPrinted=false
-sOutputFile=experiment.pdf -c.setpdfwrite -f/tmp/lilypond-rX8aP4)' failed
(139)

fatal error: failed files: "/tmp/lyp/wrappers/experiment.ly"
"

When I switch to the system version 2.19.84, I get my pdf without any error
message, but with the emmentaller font, not bravura. Which means it accepts
my directives for bravura but somehow ignores them.

This is what I meant.

I don't know if it matters, but I tried to install lyp form gem install and
it didn't succeed, although I had taken care of all dependencies. Then I
used the bash command and it succeeded. so I am using that particular
version of lyp. If that matters at all...

Thank you both once again,

S.A.



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Urs Liska-3
Am Dienstag, den 17.03.2020, 07:10 -0700 schrieb Sami Amiris:

> Hello, and thank you both for your replies.
>
> Yes, it is the lyp program as described above by Mr. Urs Liska. I
> have a
> Fedora 31 system and a Windows system as well, but right now I am
> using the
> Fedora one. I use vim and call lilypond from the command line - the
> program
> gives me the output logs in the terminal.
>
> As I have installed lyp, I thought to have a \require "bravura" and a
> \bravuraOn as required.
>
> When using the lyp-installed lilypond 2.20, it fails to produce a
> pdf,
> producing this message instead:
>
> "
> ...
> Converting to `experiment.pdf'...
> warning: `(gs -q -dSAFER -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=595.28
> -dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS=841.89 -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dNOPAUSE
> -dBATCH
> -r1200 -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dAutoRotatePages=/None -dPrinted=false
> -sOutputFile=experiment.pdf -c.setpdfwrite -f/tmp/lilypond-rX8aP4)'
> failed
> (139)
>
> fatal error: failed files: "/tmp/lyp/wrappers/experiment.ly"
> "

All I can say at this point is that this reminds me of an issue we had
earlier which is due to a version mismatch of GhostScript. This can
also be an issue when choosing a LilyPond installation from
Frescobaldi.

When you install LilyPond from the download on lilypond.org it will
create a wrapper script that properly sets the environment for the
LilyPond version to be used.
In Frescobaldi, when you choose a LilyPond binary this is not the case,
and there can be mismatches when LilyPond expects specific versions of
a library but the operating system defaults to another. (I thought we
had fixed that issue but just recently I'm experiencing it again, with
2.20).

What I mean is that lyp may also run into that trap not to properly set
up the invocation for LilyPond, which can lead to the problem you
experience when the system's default Ghostscript version doesn't matcht
the one LilyPond expects.

I suggest you raise this as an issue on the lyp Github tracker, maybe
including the paragraphs above as a hint to a possible reason.

Urs

>
> When I switch to the system version 2.19.84, I get my pdf without any
> error
> message, but with the emmentaller font, not bravura. Which means it
> accepts
> my directives for bravura but somehow ignores them.
>
> This is what I meant.
>
> I don't know if it matters, but I tried to install lyp form gem
> install and
> it didn't succeed, although I had taken care of all dependencies.
> Then I
> used the bash command and it succeeded. so I am using that particular
> version of lyp. If that matters at all...
>
> Thank you both once again,
>
> S.A.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Sami Amiris
Thank you very much, will do. Yes, it looks very much like that.

Thanks again.

-S.A.



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

David Wright
In reply to this post by Sami Amiris
On Tue 17 Mar 2020 at 07:10:42 (-0700), Sami Amiris wrote:

> On Tue 17 Mar 2020 at 13:02:07 (+0100), Francisco Vila wrote:
> > El 16/3/20 a las 18:39, Sami Amiris escribió:
> > > I installed all packages as well. To my dismay, it did not
> > > print at all.
> >
> > Here you should tell exactly which stage of the whole printing process
> > you reached. "Printing" is sometimes used in the manuals for
> > "rendering" but there are intermediate PS files which could be correct
> > even if latest Ghostscript command fails.
> >
> When using the lyp-installed lilypond 2.20, it fails to produce a pdf,
> producing this message instead:
>
> "
> ...
> Converting to `experiment.pdf'...
> warning: `(gs -q -dSAFER -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=595.28
> -dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS=841.89 -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH
> -r1200 -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dAutoRotatePages=/None -dPrinted=false
> -sOutputFile=experiment.pdf -c.setpdfwrite -f/tmp/lilypond-rX8aP4)' failed
> (139)
>
> fatal error: failed files: "/tmp/lyp/wrappers/experiment.ly"
> "

So did the PostScript file look OK? (In this case, it's the file
/tmp/lilypond-rX8aP4, but you might have to repeat the run if /tmp has
since been cleaned.) There are various PostScript viewers about,
such as atril, evince, okular and zathura/zathura-ps as well as
ghostscript/gv itself.

Cheers,
David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Sami Amiris
Well, that was a true surprise there. Yes, the ps file is fine. Its
conversion to pdf seems to be the problem. Plus, it is all with the bravura
font as I had written.

Thank you for the tip. Never expected it tbh...

Still, what do we do now? Apart from reporting it to the Git hub that is?

Thank you once again,

S.A.



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

David Wright
On Tue 17 Mar 2020 at 13:56:20 (-0700), Sami Amiris wrote:
> Well, that was a true surprise there. Yes, the ps file is fine. Its
> conversion to pdf seems to be the problem. Plus, it is all with the bravura
> font as I had written.

That's good news for LilyPond itself.

> Thank you for the tip. Never expected it tbh...
>
> Still, what do we do now? Apart from reporting it to the Git hub that is?

Apart from reporting, it might be worth trying to use exterior tools
to convert the PS to PDF. The system versions might use a
self-consistent set of binaries and support files, even if all they're
doing is using ghostscript at some level. You even have a choice of
linux and windows platforms to try on. Tedious, but it might get you
up and running.

Cheers,
David.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Urs Liska-3
Am Dienstag, den 17.03.2020, 16:25 -0500 schrieb David Wright:

> On Tue 17 Mar 2020 at 13:56:20 (-0700), Sami Amiris wrote:
> > Well, that was a true surprise there. Yes, the ps file is fine. Its
> > conversion to pdf seems to be the problem. Plus, it is all with the
> > bravura
> > font as I had written.
>
> That's good news for LilyPond itself.
>
> > Thank you for the tip. Never expected it tbh...
> >
> > Still, what do we do now? Apart from reporting it to the Git hub
> > that is?
>
> Apart from reporting, it might be worth trying to use exterior tools
> to convert the PS to PDF. The system versions might use a
> self-consistent set of binaries and support files, even if all
> they're
> doing is using ghostscript at some level. You even have a choice of
> linux and windows platforms to try on. Tedious, but it might get you
> up and running.
>

But better would be to get the LilyPond invocation right.
The wrapper script created by the LilyPond installer (download version)
includes (depending on the install location)

  export LD_LIBRARY_PATH="/home/<user>/lilypond/usr/lib"

And it should be possible to get lyp to use something in the LilyPond
invocation too.

HTH
Urs

> Cheers,
> David.
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Sami Amiris

> Apart from reporting, it might be worth trying to use exterior tools
> to convert the PS to PDF. The system versions might use a
> self-consistent set of binaries and support files, even if all
> they're
> doing is using ghostscript at some level. You even have a choice of
> linux and windows platforms to try on. Tedious, but it might get you
> up and running.

I have. I used gsview and it worked, complaining, but it did work. So there
is a workaround.

>But better would be to get the LilyPond invocation right.
>The wrapper script created by the LilyPond installer (download version)
i>ncludes (depending on the install location)
>
>  export LD_LIBRARY_PATH="/home/<user>/lilypond/usr/lib"
>
>And it should be possible to get lyp to use something in the LilyPond
i>nvocation too.

Naive question, but just asking anyway: Is this something that I can do, or
is it the developer's job to make it happen?

Thanks again!

S.A.



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Urs Liska-3
Am Dienstag, den 17.03.2020, 15:01 -0700 schrieb Sami Amiris:

> > Apart from reporting, it might be worth trying to use exterior
> > tools
> > to convert the PS to PDF. The system versions might use a
> > self-consistent set of binaries and support files, even if all
> > they're
> > doing is using ghostscript at some level. You even have a choice of
> > linux and windows platforms to try on. Tedious, but it might get
> > you
> > up and running.
>
> I have. I used gsview and it worked, complaining, but it did work. So
> there
> is a workaround.
>
> > But better would be to get the LilyPond invocation right.
> > The wrapper script created by the LilyPond installer (download
> > version)
> i>ncludes (depending on the install location)
> >  export LD_LIBRARY_PATH="/home/<user>/lilypond/usr/lib"
> >
> > And it should be possible to get lyp to use something in the
> > LilyPond
> i>nvocation too.
>
> Naive question, but just asking anyway: Is this something that I can
> do, or
> is it the developer's job to make it happen?

I'm not sure how lyp invokes LilyPond. But probably this is something
that lyp should do right. So if you can fix the (Perl?) code you would
be able to do that (and file a Pull Request). If you don't it's the
developer's job, but you can help him by determining to the best of
your possibilities, what exactly the script should be doing.

Urs

>
> Thanks again!
>
> S.A.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lyp

Sami Amiris
I wrote it in Git. The code probably is in Ruby, but I don't know enough Ruby
to fix it at this point anyway. I reported the problem and it is up to the
developers now.

Thanks again!

S.A.



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html