Re: Ghostscript 7.05-2 ready for review, upload (fwd)

[Pavel Tsekov <ptsekov at gmx dot net>]

Ok, then - will you fix  the 'ghostscript' requires directive ? I thought
the change was intentional because i saw the old 'requires' line was
commented. Btw why don't you check your setup.hint files first - I guess
as a maintainer you're the one that knows best how the setup.hint should
look like.

About the 'zlib' dependency - I was just pointing out that zlib can be
safely omitted. I think it doesn't hurt if you keep the zlib as
dependency, though.

When you fix the setup.hint files as necessary, please, let us know, so I
or someone else on the list can check them again.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 20:53:53 -0800
From: Dario Alcocer <alcocer@helixdigital.com>
To: Pavel Tsekov <ptsekov@gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Ghostscript 7.05-2 ready for review, upload

On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 07:10:34PM +0100, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
> I reviewed the hint files. The only difference i see between 7.05-1 and
> the new version is in the setup.hint for 'ghostscript' -
> 'ghostscript-base' is not required anymore.

Hmm, I don't know if this is correct; I pretty sure that the
ghostscript package will not run without without the -base package.
The -base package contains all the font files (among other things.)

> It seems  this was made
> intentionally, so it should be ok. Next thing that I see is that you put
> in the 'requires' directive for 'ghostscript' and 'ghostscript-x11' both
> libpng12 and zlib. This should be not necessary since libpng12 includes
> zlib in its 'requires' directive.

OK, I guess I was just being explicit; running cygcheck on gs.exe
I think will show that zlib is required, so I was just making sure
it got included.

-- 
Dario Alcocer -- Sr. Software Developer, Helix Digital Inc.
alcocer@helixdigital.com -- http://www.helixdigital.com