From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#27563: [PATCH v3 2/2] gnu: ghostscript: Write document ID only when encrypting. Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 14:02:04 +0200 Message-ID: <87podca20z.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20170703200844.3f6d9e19@scratchpost.org> <20170706103216.25939-1-dannym@scratchpost.org> <20170706103216.25939-3-dannym@scratchpost.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58814) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dTRyT-0006PH-CP for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2017 08:03:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dTRyQ-0005t8-9V for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2017 08:03:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:53128) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dTRyQ-0005t3-78 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2017 08:03:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dTRyP-0006UN-TJ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2017 08:03:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20170706103216.25939-3-dannym@scratchpost.org> (Danny Milosavljevic's message of "Thu, 6 Jul 2017 12:32:16 +0200") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Danny Milosavljevic Cc: 27563@debbugs.gnu.org Danny Milosavljevic skribis: > * gnu/packages/patches/ghostscript-no-header-id.patch: New file. > * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Add it. > * gnu/packages/ghostscript.scm (ghostscript)[source]: Use it. [...] > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000..3526a300e > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gnu/packages/patches/ghostscript-no-header-id.patch Please add an explanation here. Also, do you know whether the PDF specs are OK with that? Might be good to discuss with upstream, we wouldn=E2=80=99t want to generate somewhat bro= ken PDFs. WDYT? Thank you, Ludo=E2=80=99.