X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<20060219033435.99716.qmail@web51504.mail.yahoo.com>
Date:	Sat, 18 Feb 2006 19:34:35 -0800 (PST)
From:	"James R. Phillips" <antiskid56-cygwin AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To:	antiskid56-cygwin AT yahoo DOT com
Subject:	Re: ghostscript-8.50 packaging question
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version:	1.0
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

This is a reasonable question.  For this release I did not try to change the
structure developed by the previous maintainer, and for which I am aware of no
particular complaints.  However, I am willing to try to improve the structure
of the package for future releases.  In particular I wish to move from "Method
1" to "Method 2" for the packaging.

However I am not persuaded that there is an actual problem here.  I don't think
it is intended that both ghostscript and ghostscript-x11 be installed, but
rather one or the other.  In this case, the overlapping of files between the
two packages is not a bug, but a feature.  It should probably be documented
more carefully in a README, however.




--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -