Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 17:31:26 +0900 From: KATO Tsuguru <tkato@prontomail.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: ghostscript commits (fix of back out request) Message-ID: <20030608173126.5481b445.tkato@prontomail.com> In-Reply-To: <20030608073309.GA4822@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <20030607211633.GA78779@freefall.freebsd.org> <bbtqo8$1f0p$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> <20030608092359.511b962a.tkato@prontomail.com> <bbu8ua$2b9p$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> <20030608034254.GA3680@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20030608160707.1553df13.tkato@prontomail.com> <20030608073309.GA4822@rot13.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 00:33:09 -0700 Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > As far as I can tell, just having the package installed doesn't bring > any new features to the system unless you choose to configure your > system to use CUPS for printing instead of the default lpr. As such, > I think it's something that should be off by default. Well, necessary part of CUPS is just the headers and shared libraries in print/cups-base. print/cups-lpr isn't required unless you really want to print with entire CUPS environment. You normally don't have to aware existence of CUPS and work with default lpr. > I recommend making !CUPS the default, and adding a WITH_CUPS knob, or > a ghostscript-gnu-cups slave port if necessary. As far as the difference is only dependency of one or two shared libraries, increasing numbers of slave ports might be a bad idea for me. In addtion, I personally think that shared library support shouldn't be disabled by default if there is no paticular reason.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030608173126.5481b445.tkato>