Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> writes: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 08:47:27PM +0100, Hans Aberg wrote: >> >> On 12 Dec 2012, at 16:32, David Kastrup wrote: >> > Stupid question: why would one create executable shims to something like >> > DIR/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/* in ~/bin and then add ~/bin to >> > one's PATH when one can just add >> > DIR/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/ instead? Is DIR expected to >> > contain stuff that is bad for PATH? >> >> This directory contains other stuff that might be conflicting with >> other same named executable. For example, ps2pdf and such comes with >> the TeXLive installation. > > Yes, that's precisely the case. Back in the 10.4 days, prepending > that directory to the path resulted in other programs (such as > pdflatex) being unable to produce valid pdf files due to some conflict > or missing share directory. The executable shims ensure that lilypond > uses the packaged ps2pdf, while other command-line osx programs don't > use that.
Then we should put those executables provided just for the sake of our own programs internally into a separate directory rather than bin. I have seen libexec being used for that. > This particular problem might be avoidable by appending that dir to > the path rather than prepending, but then I'd be concerned about > lilypond using the system ps2pdf rather than our packaged one. > > The executable shims avoid those problems, while being relatively easy > to explain to newbies. The libexec route appears to cater for all of that. We should use bin just for executables supposed to be entry points of LilyPond. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
