On Wed 2008.12.03 at 16:41 +0100, L?VAI D?niel wrote: > On Tuesday 02 December 2008 03.41.51 Okan Demirmen wrote: > > seems i've missed a bit here while away... > > > > 2 things: > > > > koffice 1.6 branch does not support newer GraphicsMagick versions. > > > > i still don't understand the no_gs thing. as kili pointed out, it > > can be pinned down to removing the run dependency of ghostscript, but > > why? for example, GraphicsMagick supports RAW images, hence a build > > dependency on dcraw - should we force the user to read the output of > > gm error messages to guess which additional package one needs to > > install to get the compiled-in functionality? i'm of the opinion > > 'no'. same goes with the gs binary being available if the package > > has been built to support it. > What are you suggesting?
maybe i used too many words ;) what i'm really asking is: what is the big deal of having ghostscript as a RUN_DEPENDS? if the port is built with ghostscript support, shouldn't it just work when installed? cheers, okan
