Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> Analogously, we also have *.pfa fonts in mf/out and
>> mf/out-www, which are mostly the same. What's the role
>> of this?
>
> That's strange, out-www/ shouldn't contain pfa files. Can
> you investigate how they ended up
Ferenc Wagner writes:
>> Yes. If possible - the idea is that the lilypond package
>> has the info files without .png, and lilypond-doc has the
>> PNGs for those info files.
>
> And the replacement info files which reference those PNGs, I
> guess.
There is not really a need to package the info fil
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> now we have a conventional (out/*, image alt only) and www
>> (out-www/*, image src present) Info documentation. Should
>> the files of the latter override those of the former when
>> installed?
>
> Yes. If possible -
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> No, our idea was to have the info files that reference the PNGs be
> distributed with the base package.
>
> (or I'm mistaken. Jan?)
Yes, that's right. The info files produced and installed by `make
web' are image-ready, but readable without images too.
The reason that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> >> now we have a conventional (out/*, image alt only) and www
> >> (out-www/*, image src present) Info documentation. Should
> >> the files of the latter override those of the former wh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Hello,
>
> now we have a conventional (out/*, image alt only) and www
> (out-www/*, image src present) Info documentation. Should
> the files of the latter override those of the former when
> installed?
Yes. If possible - the idea is that the lilypond p
Hello,
now we have a conventional (out/*, image alt only) and www
(out-www/*, image src present) Info documentation. Should
the files of the latter override those of the former when
installed? Analogously, we also have *.pfa fonts in mf/out
and mf/out-www, which are mostly the sam
