On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 12:50:51 +0200, David Kastrup <[email protected]> wrote:
> Aaron Hill <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > With the release of 2.19.82, I pulled down the latest docs in PDF form
> > for reference. However, it appears nearly all of them have notation
> > with missing or incorrect fonts. The HTML versions seem fine and show
> > the notation snippets correctly.
>
> Ugh. That's what we have prereleases for. There have been a number of
> PDF generation related changes/fixes in master. Would it be possible to
> get a comparison of a GUB build from master? Basically, generating the
> notation manual with the full GUB process but without actually tagging
> or otherwise going through with the 2.21.0 release?
>
> Because that could significantly narrow down the problem.
I don't do GUB but running a make doc on current master and scanning the NR, I
am not seeing anything obviously wrong.
If Aaron has specific examples (which doc, which page) then maybe I can at
least confirm this on master if that is going to help or not?
James
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
