Re: Ghostscript patches and packaging

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Quentin Spencer writes:

> I'm an occasional user of lilypond, and new to this list. I'm also the
> maintainer of a few packages in Fedora Extras, and I'm considering
> submitting lilypond for inclusion there.

That's grand.

> currently in Fedora, and amazingly, my PDFs are now back down to their
> small sizes again.

> so clearly there are special cases that gs 8.15 can't handle.

Indeed.  8.50 is now GPL, so that should be used.

> I would like to put a request in Fedora's bugzilla to add this
> patch, however, I would like to present a convincing reason for why
> it needs to be included. Can someone give an explanation of what the
> patch does and where it came from (is this already in upstream CVS,
> for example)?

Yes, have a look at ghostscript bugzilla.  If I'm not mistaken,
without this patch ghostscript will include a copy of the/a font for
each unknown local glyph.  So, smaller PDFs are not really something
to be amazed about ;-)

But, there are more patches that GUB/ghostscript uses, one for windows,
two build patches and most relevant:

    ghostscript-8.50-ttf.patch:
    Bug 688154 "TTF file fails to load".

Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org