lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: stack smashing detected


From: Thomas Morley
Subject: Re: stack smashing detected
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 23:58:15 +0200

Am Do., 25. Apr. 2019 um 19:22 Uhr schrieb Karlin High <address@hidden>:
>
> On 4/25/2019 5:14 AM, Thomas Morley wrote:
> > Background: I'm exploring whether it would be feasable to draw higher
> > order bezier-curves, splitting them in cubic ones.
>
> > I'm aware Urs already did some work in this regard, though his
> > approach was different, iirc.
>
> Threads from September 2016...
>
> "Compound Slurs"
> <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-09/msg00575.html>
>
> "What to do with wanting a 4th order Bezier"
> <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-09/msg00436.html>
>
> Somewhere in there, I remember Urs Liska had LilyPond producing the
> Sorabij Clavicembalisticum slur, as well as others that resembled my
> 5-year-old's work with Microsoft Paint.
>
> Or was all of that the "different approaches" that are not aligned with
> the efforts in this thread?

Hi Karlin,

this thread is about the 'stack smashing detected' message for overful
control-points. ;)

Ofcourse I highly appreciate any hint/comment about the underlying
work, which triggered the crash.
Thus many thinks for the links you posted.

Though I have a problem here:
I've found Urs' code here
https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets
in a subfolder.

So how to make it work?
git clone https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets.git
will give me the repository, but obviously a lot is missing.
What am I supposed to do?
Is the link above correct at all?
Is there documentation I missed?

In README of the snippets:
"
The openLilyLib Package

But the snippets repository is also a member of the family of
openLilyLib packages. In this family it is sort of an exception as
different from the other packages the snippets may also be used
directly, without making use of the central oll-core package.
"

Obviously wrong. :(

Nevertheless I can read the code, and Urs' approach _is_ different.
For what I can say without testing, it follows more the advice David
already gave in this thread.

Thanks,
  Harm



reply via email to

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