Need a ghostscript maintainer

[Charles S. Wilson]

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/