On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Joris van der Hoeven <vdhoe...@texmacs.org > wrote:
> Hi Michael, > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 04:10:24PM +0200, Michael Lachmann wrote: > > I'm not sure if you already went through the whole pile of texmacs-dev > mails... I just wanted to see what you think about the hack I posted below. > I have been using this for around 1.5 months, and it seems to work quite > well. Images load MUCH faster than before. I think that the cache handling > is probably better handled from inside TeXmacs instead of by an external > script as I do. In any case I think it is a good idea not to have the image > conversion ps-to-png hard-coded into TeXmacs. > > (Instead of what is written below, because of feedback from the mailing > list, I put the image cache in .TeXmacs/system/cache/images, and the CRC is > separated into letters with a directory for each letter. Its current size > for me, after 1.5 months of use is 13M. ) > > Yes, I agree that we should use an image cache for this kind of thing, > even though more control over the cache would indeed be a good thing. > Could you send me a complete patch, if possible with doing the caching > from inside TeXmacs and using a safe mechanism for cache names? > Notice also that the -dEPSCrop option of ghostscript does not work > if there is a non trivial offset. For this reason, I just hacked > the code so as to use ImageMagick in that case. > > Good... because the generated .eps from gs>9.0 are massive but imagemagick does a decent job. (gs folks will add an epswrite target sometime later).
_______________________________________________ Texmacs-dev mailing list Texmacs-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
