On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 08:45:16 +0200 pertusus@xxxxxxx (Patrice Dumas) wrote: > On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 11:27:10PM +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > > > > Hm. I wonder if xfprint could be patched to use enscript instead of > > a2ps - enscript doesn't have such dependencies. > > enscript doesn't use delegation, it is only for text files. In that > case, paps may be a better solution. a2ps allows to use many more > document types. In fact xfprint can autodetect if a2ps is installed at run time. However, there would then just be a lot less options available for people running it, and not any indication why. ;( Since we don't have anything like a "Suggests:" in rpm, I think it's best that we require a2ps so all the options are available to users. We could look at changing to paps or something, but that should probibly be done upstream. I see that there are some of the translation files that talk about a2ps, so they would all need to be retranslated if another package was used. ;( > Pat kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
