Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com
Reply-To: <nhv@cape.com>
From: "Norman Vine" <nhv@cape.com>
To: <cygwin@cygwin.com>
Subject: RE: May need a ghostscript maintainer
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 23:05:53 -0400
Message-ID: <000801c0d37d$f8019580$a300a8c0@nhv>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-reply-to: <20010423161323.A24872@redhat.com>
Importance: Normal

Christopher Faylor writes:
>>
>Is anyone willing to maintain this?  We need to provide an X-less
>version of ghostscript.  Norman Vine has managed to do this, so it is
>not an impossible feat:
>
>http://www.vso.cape.com/~nhv/files/cygwin/gs6.62/
>
>If someone would like to volunteer to do this, please respond to this
>thread.  

FYI
I just downloaded the ghostscript 7.0 source and for the heck of it
just tried the makefile linked from my page with out applying any of 
the other fixes that I mention

Lo and behold gs compiled and made pdf's of all the examples. :-))

This was on a binary mounted drive so there may be a fopen bug
lurking somewhere but ....

My question to the list is 
"Should I submit my makefile to the ghostscript maintainers
for inclusion in the main ghostscript distribution as cygwin.mak"

Then I believe to get a functional ghostscript one would only
need to unpack the tarball and do

% ln -s src/cygwin.mak
% make

Cheers

Norman Vine


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