Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Your last iteration of the patch looks ok to me. Let's just ask Georg if
> this is what he had in mind in his comment at #9778.
You mean the one from April 18? Yes, this is what I had in mind. The only
question I'd have (at this point of the release phase) is whether there are
situations where the builtin qt SVG support would give a reasonable result,
but there is no good svg->{pdf6,eps,png} converter defined, so the
conversion with imagemagick could fail or produce low quality results. Maybe
it would be better to omit svg only if an explicit svg->png converter is
defined?
> Probably related: http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/9228
I'd think so as well.
Georg
