Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 11:06:55 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/print/ghostscript-afpl Makefile distinfo pkg-plist ports/print/ghostscript-afpl/files escputil.contrib.mak hpijs.contrib.mak patch-hpijs:makefile patch-hpijs:platform.h patch-src:unix-gcc.mak stp.contrib.mak ports/print/ghostscript-afpl/scripts ... Message-ID: <3C2C362F.7A151056@FreeBSD.org> References: <200112280837.fBS8bVf26137@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > On 27 Dec, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > On Thu, 2001-12-27 at 21:59, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > >> On 27 Dec, Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira wrote: > >> > >> > - Better support for jpeg WRKDIR location > >> > >> According to the Ghostscript's Make.htm, the only reason GS needs its > >> own version of JPEG, is because Adobe's PostScript interpreters > >> "don't follow JPEG standard exactly". Which forces GS developers to > >> build JPEG with the following: > >> > >> #define D_MAX_BLOCKS_IN_MCU 64 > >> > >> perhaps, this is how we should build our JPEG port to start with and > >> make gs use -ljpeg, like everything else? > > > > What's the gain? > > Generally, it is considered advantageous to share the common libraries > between different executables. Smaller run-time memory requirements, > smaller on-disk binary size, easier maintainance, etc. I would say "no" if it means that the resulting library would read, or even worse produce, non-conformant jpeg images, especially considering that the code bloat is only around 100k. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C2C362F.7A151056>