Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com
Message-ID: <05b101c0d260$e10d1c00$100b07d5@andreas>
From: "Andreas Eibach" <a.eibach@gmx.net>
To: <cygwin@cygwin.com>
Subject: Questionable inclusion of ghostscript in setup.exe?
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 19:05:08 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

HI,

after reading several ghostscript threads in this mailing list for a while,
I ask myself if it isn't at least a bit questionable to really include
ghostscript in setup.exe. Facts are, that - on a standard Cygwin
distribution (i. e. _without_ X) there simply IS NO ready-to-use version of
ghostscript.

Norman Vine (thank you!) has managed to build a non-X ghostscript, however,
you must build it yourself and the binary distributed with Cygwin will ONLY
work with an X installation due to internal references to /usr/X11R6/*. IOW,
a non-X user can just move the binary to the trashcan because it won't make
use to him/her because it complains about a missing XFree DLL, LIBICE.DLL.

I suggest to either include a _non-X_ version or omit it because "the way it
comes", it's unusable for people who don't have X.

Andreas


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple