Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

> Kei Kebreau <kei@openmailbox.org> writes:
>
>> Indeed it is not. I've removed these inputs from the new patch. As a
>> side note, lilypond was required as a runtime dependency so I moved it
>> to propagated-inputs.
>
> Do you think it would be possible to patch the sources to refer to the
> Lilypond executable instead of propagating the input?

Good idea! Does this patch look good to you?