Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2003 23:01:49 -0500 From: Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ghostscript commits (fix of back out request) Message-ID: <oprqfj5bht8ckrg5@smtp.central.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <20030608034254.GA3680@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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 7 Jun 2003 20:42:54 -0700, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 03:01:30AM +0000, Christian Weisgerber wrote: >> KATO Tsuguru <tkato@prontomail.com> wrote: >> >> > Latest patch in ports/52479 (for ghostscript-afpl) and >> > ports/52480 (for ghostscript-gnu) contains fix for this >> > issue by replacing GS_OPTIONS in scripts/configure with >> > GS_DRIVERS_LIST. >> >> The ghostscript-gnu update also incorporates cups-pstoraster and >> thus supersedes the existing print/cups-pstoraster port. It also >> adds a default dependency on cups to ghostscript. >> >> If somebody disagrees with this, speak up now! > > Why is cups required? I'd prefer not to have ghostscript suck in this > package unless I need it. I agree, cups should be optional if one of us want to enable it. Cheers, Mezz > Kris -- bsdforums.org 's moderator, mezz.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?oprqfj5bht8ckrg5>