Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: From: Peter Ring To: "'cygwin AT cygwin DOT com'" Subject: RE: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: ghostscript-6.51-3 Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:34:15 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Please forgive a silly question. I've rebuild the previous release (ghostscript-6.51-1) with X support (mainly for use with xdvik in order to view dvi's with postscript illustrations). While this were not a major hassle (just patch src/unix-gcc.mak a little, don't forget to set XLIBS=Xt SM ICE Xext X11), are there any reason not to release X-enabled binaries for ghostscript? Will gs then not run without the X runtime libraries? Kind regards Peter Ring -----Original Message----- From: Dario Alcocer [mailto:alcocer AT helixdigital DOT com] Sent: 19. februar 2002 22:45 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: ghostscript-6.51-3 The Ghostscript package has been updated to fix a bug reported by Greg Bond related to operation on text-mode mounts: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2001-12/msg00400.html This release of Ghostscript is an "X-less" version (i.e. one that doesn't require X11), and so can be used without the cygwin-xfree packages. The GNU 'standard' and 'other' Ghostscript font collections are included for convenience. -- 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/