On Tuesday, 20 Feb 2001, Robert L Krawitz wrote:

>    Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:30:56 +0000
>    From: Austin Donnelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>    I think the easiest thing is to have the version in CVS (and gimp
>    snapshots) to include the code for the shared library, and an
>    integrated build system.  I'd even go so far to say that the plugin
>    should be statically linked against the library, to avoid version
>    skew if the user installs a different version of the shlib later.
> This sounds like you're suggesting that we split out libgimpprint and
> the clients into separate packages.


> This would total four (libgimpprint and associated tests, the
> plugin, the CUPS driver, and the Ghostscript driver), plus possibly
> other packages for things like Debian and RPM packaging.

Well, maybe just 3:
  print plugin (both of these manually imported to gimp cvs)
  CPUS + Ghostscript drivers

Does the Debian maintainer have any comments how he/she would like to
see it packaged?

> I presume you'd want to pick up libgimpprint and the plugin, without
> the CUPS and Ghostscript drivers.


> We're working library version skew issues (Roger has architected and
> done an initial implementation), although there is something to be
> said for building it statically within the Gimp context.

Well, one less shared library for users to forget to install properly,
so yes :)

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to