lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Use -b together with -dgs-never-embed-fonts (issue 325630043 by addr


From: dak
Subject: Re: Use -b together with -dgs-never-embed-fonts (issue 325630043 by address@hidden)
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 04:22:31 -0700

On 2017/09/27 09:38:21, knupero wrote:
> Bikeshedding done for the day.

Let me continue.

"lilypond --help" and "lilypond -dhelp" gives perfect help to all
users. I doubt
that there are a lot of people who know which parameters to use for a
non-trivial case even after reading the help texts.

At least the following parameters influence ps / pdf output:

   --pdf
   --ps
   --use-encodings (or --bigpdf without Patch Set #2)
   -daux-files
   -dbackend
   -dgs-load-fonts
   -dgs-load-lily-fonts
   -dgs-never-embed-fonts

All names proposed in this thread (including my --use-encodings) only
slightly
varies the high level of obscurity we have reached.

I think we should have for ps/pdf parameters that do not need -d...

   --ps               meaning: generate a ps file / keep the
intermediate ps file
if also --pdf is given
   --eps              meaning: generate an eps file
   --pdf              meaning: generate a pdf file
   --pspdf-opt=..     meaning: ps/pdf optimization selection

possible values for the last parameter could be:

   --pdfodf-opt=help            meaning: display some help
   --pspdf-opt=size             meaning: optimize for file size
   --pdfodf-opt=lilypond-book   meaning: optimize for lilypond-book
   --pdfodf-opt=TeX             meaning: optimize for inclusion in *TeX
   --pdfodf-opt=TeX-GS          meaning: optimize for inclusion of
multiple files
in *TeX and postprocessing with ghostscript
   --pdfodf-opt=...             meaning: ...

How about just --pdf=<purpose> ?  One option less to remember.  This is
going to be double the fun once we can generate PDF bypassing PS
altogether.

Advantages: Significantly drops the level of obscurity, easy to
extend.

Also: can keep using the same purpose-bound options as our ways of
dancing around the current version of Ghostscript change.

Sounds like a good strategy.  Just not in time for 2.20.

https://codereview.appspot.com/325630043/



reply via email to

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