On 8/9/05, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think removing ESP Ghostscript would be a mistake. I have had good > success using it with all the printers I've ever set up. I must use > CUPS for printing and ESP Ghostscript works perfectly with it. I > don't know I would ever use another version, whether in BLFS or not.
ESP Ghostscript is basically GNU Ghostscript + CUPS related patches. So it will always lag the GNU Ghostscript release. So if one uses GNU GS with the pstoraster from the cups tarball, it looks to me like a win-win situation - new features and cups integration. > > ESP Ghostscript 8.15RC3 was just released a few months ago and this > package is maintained. I'm not sure that you saying GNU Ghostscript > "now seems to be a maintained project" makes it a better candidate > than the ESP Ghostscript. Not a very good choice of words on my part. What I meant is the GNU Ghostscript is now maintained with two releases in 2005. I didn't know ESP GS had a release since their website still shows the 7.x version. > Other comments is that if packages are already in BLFS, and don't > require very much maintenance, what is the harm in keeping them in > the book? This is a question that deserves a compelling answer. Having a version in the book is not without maintenance. With new package releases and new releases of dependencies, the instructions need to be tested again. As you said, for my installation I will using GNU Ghostscript irrespective of what the book uses :) -- Tushar Teredesai mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
