Martin Tarenskeen <m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl> writes: > On Mon, 25 Feb 2013, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Francisco Vila <paconet....@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> 2013/2/25 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >>>> I think this mainly depends on the version of Ghostscript that is being >>>> used for converting PS to PDF (used internally by LilyPond when >>>> generating PDF). The version of LilyPond, in contrast, is mostly >>>> irrelevant with respect to the problem. >>> >>> OK; so if Ghostscript is embedded in lilypond, and besides I have >>> Ghostscript installed, how could I check the embedded GS version? > > Would the problem be solved - for the time being - if ghostscript > would be called with parameters that would produce a PDF version 1.3 > document like my experiments seem to indicate? > > (I called lilypond with --ps first, and then used ps2pdf13 to produce > a pdf)
I am not sure that is equivalent. The PostScript intended to be converted into PDF likely contains additional information (like the PDF Metadata). I am not sure that the PostScript produced via just --ps will actually be the same. If you bothered following the thread you'd have noticed that there is already a patch up at <URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2985>. I don't think that we need to do more than that. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
