On Saturday 19 February 2005 14.27, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > I vote for that. It has the additional advantage that you still > > > > have both PS and PDF output with a single backend in case you use > > > > GS. Regarding fontconfig I suggest you contact the GS people for > > > > assistance -- I can imagine that other people have similar needs, > > > > and maybe a proper solution already exists. > > > > > > This would be a nice hack. It would also solve the huge amount of > > > diskspace necessary for building the web docs. Unfortunately, I > > > don't think we have enough clout to force an upgrade of GhostScript > > > everywhere within the next 2 months. > > > > lilypond needs a lot of external resources, so why not demand a recent > > version of gs too? Before diving into font issues I strongly > > Because GS is a critical infrastructure part, which ties into the > printing system of Linux distros. Fedora Core 4 will probably ship > with GS7.07 because the CUPS integration of 8.15 isn't out of beta > yet. I myself had trouble installing GS8.15 on my machine (I still > haven't worked out how to properly let it recognize system fonts), > which leads me to believe that many users will give up on lily 2.6.
If GS 8.15 looks like the best route: Why don't you keep the current ps2pdf method as an option (using a flag to ./configure or whatever), and let packagers enable the direct PDF output code if they have GS 8.15 available in their distro? Erik _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
