Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <000701c0d415$92d1ab30$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <nhv AT cape DOT com>, <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <000101c0d3d0$b905d780$a300a8c0 AT nhv>
Subject: Re: May need a ghostscript maintainer
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 23:28:16 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 May 2001 21:05:54.0211 (UTC) FILETIME=[D7401730:01C0D414]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Norman Vine" <nhv AT cape DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 10:58 PM
Subject: RE: May need a ghostscript maintainer


> Earnie Boyd writes:
> >
>
> I believe this is the norm an is the 'approved' ghostscript 'way'
>
> FYI in 'true' hacker style all I did to get this to work was
>  1) start with the supplied unix-gcc.mak
>  2) remove all 'X" references
>  3) add appropriate references to Chucks jpeg png and zlib ports
>  4) rename it cygwin.mak
>  5) with Rob Collins help work around some then missing thread stuff
>      < as of Cygwin 1.3 this is no longer necessary  :-)) >
>
> Hopefully the 'official' porter of Ghostscript will get the library to
build
> as a DLL but in the interim I thought that this would obliviate the
need
> for a ghostscript package at all as this method just WORKS !!
>
> Anyway since this appears to be controversial
> I will NOT submit a patch to the ghostscript team
> and remain content with my personal installation

It doesn't seem very controversial to me: just the usual

"this isn't the most-easy-for-novice-package-foo-users"

"Well it is for this package because-its-in-the-dark-ages"

"ok. What about feature foo"

:].

I'd strongly suggest you submit a patch to the packge authors - as long
as disabling the X stuff is a compile time option, not a
cygwin-platform-dependent-option.
(I happen to have X :])

As for the makefile name, just follow the naming convention for the
package :]]

Doing this will make the new ghostscript maintainers job easier! Thanks
for getting out and doing this...

Rob

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


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