¡Hola! Andreas Enge <andr...@enge.fr> skribis:
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 01:03:07PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> For the current solution (avoiding a full rebuild), see commit >> 61dc82d9b90d0545739c30bfc33003bd062071f0. LilyPond could hard-code the >> file name of ‘gsc’. > > This looks like too much work to implement for each package separately. > And as a permanent solution, I do not like it. > >> Alternately, we could provide a wrapper containing a ‘gs’ symlink. > > This would be one option. Or we could add another package, corresponding > to the previous definition, that we would use only as an input to the > packages in core-updates that do not build right now. This solution could > be implemented using copy-paste and not take much time. I would then also > remove the ad-hoc lilypond patching. I went ahead and pushed these two commits, which seem to address the issue: d8eb912 * gnu: Use 'ghostscript-gs' in packages that need the 'gs' command. 71eba3e * gnu: Add 'ghostscript-gs' and 'ghostscript-gs-with-x'. > Then after core-updates is merged, we could add the gs->gsc link to our > ghostscript packages. Yes, we should do that afterwards. Apologies for the breakage! Ludo'.
