From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Mupdf Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 10:08:55 +0100 Message-ID: <20160312090855.GA17561@solar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39437) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aefXl-0003PM-JO for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 04:09:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aefXg-00039m-Kp for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 04:09:05 -0500 Received: from mailrelay2.public.one.com ([91.198.169.125]:30021) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aefXg-00039g-79 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 04:09:00 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: guix-devel@gnu.org Hello, I just updated mupdf to the latest version 1.8 and streamlined the package recipe at the same occasion. As a result, the binary is now called "mupdf-x11" instead of "mupdf"; previously the makefile was patched to change the name. As we usually follow upstream (for instance, we keep the "soffice" binary instead of calling it "libreoffice"), I think this is in line with our policy and did not port that part of the patch. Andreas