Fwd: Re: Incorporating .epsi files into TeX docs : failure
Mon Aug 11 14:34:00 GMT 2003
The forwarded message sounds like a packaging issue with the ghostscript
packages. I doubt that the name clash (i.e., gs.exe in /usr/bin and
/usr/X11R6/bin) is a good idea. In fact, the new source package *also*
contains a bin/gs.exe -- go figure. From the forwarded message, it seems
to already present a slight problem. Could someone check that this is an
FWIW, I'd recommend renaming gs.exe in the -x11 package to gs-x11.exe (or
xgs.exe), and putting a note about making an alias (or an exported shell
function) into the README file. I don't know if the bin/gs.exe in the
source package is an oversight, or if it's really needed. Dario?
|\ _,,,---,,_ email@example.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ firstname.lastname@example.org
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route
to the bathroom is a major career booster." -- Patrick Naughton
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:32:12 +0100
From: fergus at bonhard dot uklinux dot net
To: cygwin-xfree at cygwin dot com
Subject: Re: Incorporating .epsi files into TeX docs : failure
Thank you very much indeed. I put /usr/X11R6/bin/ before /usr/bin/ in the
PATH so that the gs.exe I wanted was picked up before the other gs.exe I
didn't want. Now it all works perfectly. I'll leave PATH defined like this
(i.e. with the transposition).
There may be other consequences, not all good, since I don't always start
XWin ... we'll see.
More information about the Cygwin-apps