X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org X-Matched-Lists: [] Message-ID: <67310-22005124292356663@cantv.net> Reply-To: rodmedina AT cantv DOT net From: "Rodrigo Medina" To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Why no-X11 ghostscript? Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 22:03:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Status: Clean 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 Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On 2005/12/28 18:08:11, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: >Rodrigo Medina wrote: >> Hi, >> If I am not mistaken, gs-X11 does everything that gs-no-X11 does, then >> why distributing gs-no-X11 at all? A lot problems may arise due to the >> presence of two different programs with the same name. >> Of course all the programs of the package should go into /bin. >> Bye >> Happy holidays >> R.M. >Are you suggesting that gs-no-X11 requires X11? If so, that's a bug. If >not, should we assume your question is rhetorical? As the gs-no-X11 does something that gs-X11 does no do, that is it works without X11 DLLs, my question was not rhetorical, it was stupid. Nevertheless that does not solve the problem of the conflict between the two programs. I suggest doing the following: 1- Having a unique ghostscript package, with both gs-x.exe and gs.no-x.exe. 2- Install all executables, including both gs programs in /bin. 3- If X11 is installed then copy gs-x.exe to gs.exe, otherwise copy gs.no-x.exe to gs.exe Bye Happy New Year R.M. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/