[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 2.13.40 regtests
From: |
Neil Puttock |
Subject: |
Re: 2.13.40 regtests |
Date: |
Tue, 23 Nov 2010 21:55:34 +0000 |
On 21 November 2010 23:16, Graham Percival <address@hidden> wrote:
> Huh. So evidently there's some other reason behind the fix for
> this break not being detected? It might be related to the
> imagemagick's syntax change:
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=908
I don't think this is the problem.
The check relies on a grob existing in the baseline image for
comparison with the check image; in this case, there's no BassFigure
in the original image, and its appearance in the changed image has no
effect on other bounding boxes, so there's no distance change.
Cheers,
Neil
- 2.13.40 regtests, Phil Holmes, 2010/11/21
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Valentin Villenave, 2010/11/21
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2010/11/21
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Graham Percival, 2010/11/21
- Message not available
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Graham Percival, 2010/11/21
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests,
Neil Puttock <=
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Phil Holmes, 2010/11/24
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Neil Puttock, 2010/11/24
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Phil Holmes, 2010/11/25
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Neil Puttock, 2010/11/25
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Graham Percival, 2010/11/25
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Neil Puttock, 2010/11/25
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Graham Percival, 2010/11/25
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Phil Holmes, 2010/11/26
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Phil Holmes, 2010/11/26
- Re: 2.13.40 regtests, Valentin Villenave, 2010/11/26