On Tuesday, 20 Feb 2001, Robert L Krawitz wrote: > Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 10:30:56 +0000 > From: Austin Donnelly <austin@xxxxxxxx> > > 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. Yes. > 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: libgimpprint 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. Yup. > 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 :) Austin
