Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <3B415804.8020400@ece.gatech.edu> Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 01:28:36 -0400 From: "Charles S. Wilson" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:0.9.1) Gecko/20010607 Netscape6/6.1b1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Collins CC: Dmitry Timoshkov , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Need a ghostscript maintainer References: <20010628221547 DOT A3873 AT redhat DOT com> <20010629174426 DOT C9027 AT redhat DOT com> <02bd01c1020a$19687850$c6823bd5 AT dima> <068c01c1021e$9dccbe80$806410ac AT local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Collins wrote: > > In fact it didn't use to be provided. Users asked for it. Check the > archives. (Native ghostscript doesn't support cygwin paths for starters && > what about X support). > Actually, until cygwin-xfree becomes an official part of the setup.exe-supported cygwin platform, ghostscript should not be built with X support at all. If ghostscript has X support, then it will *require* that users download & install the huge cygwin-xfree package (without the assistance of setup.exe) -- or else gs.exe will complain of missing dll's. Thus, the "official" ghostscript package shouldn't have X support/dependency. For the rest of the question, "Why provide a cygwin ghostscript?", Jerome's answer is good (paraphrase): The ability to understand and use unixlike cygwin path constructs, and to call gs.exe from scripts are crucial in many cases, especially 'teTeX'. --Chuck -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/