Building on OS X

[Matthias Neeracher]

> From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden>
>
> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>
> > I think that the proper place is the packager for MacOS X, which is
> > Matthias Neeracher, I hope he can fold in your changes into his Fink
> > package.
>
> I'm not sure.  Would it not be a good thing (tm) if lily compiled out
> of the box, package or not?

Sounds like a good idea to me; it would simplify the fink package as well (there are still some patches in the fink package which don't apply to the general purpose situation, e.g. fink prefers flat .info-xxx files rather than the separate folder created by standard lilypond install).

Obviously, I think that Mac users should prefer to install the fink package, as that simplifies the dependency management considerably, but hey, if somebody wants to get their hands greasy installing all dependencies by hand, who am I to interfere ?-)

> Is this fix for the fink package, or for the vanilla sources?

Presumably the latter.

I got a fink package for 2.3 to compile 1-2 weeks ago. The reason it's not available yet is that I need to figure out and package the new fonts. I haven't seen much discussion about this on the mailing list any more lately, so can I assume that you are more or less going to stay with the font package you've chosen for 2.3?

Matthias