| 1 |
On Saturday 06 of March 2010 18:05:20 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Would it be possible to make cups a PDEPEND in gtk+ or is it really |
| 4 |
> > needed at compile time? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> cups is definitely needed at compile-time |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> > The same for cups: can we make poppler a PDEPEND? Maciej, did |
| 9 |
> > you get any further with looking into that? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> From what I can see in cups-1.3.11, pdftops is purely a runtime |
| 12 |
> dependency. The configure flags enable code that doesn't need pdftops |
| 13 |
> at compile-time. Infact, poppler[utils] is in pure RDEPEND to reflect |
| 14 |
> that. So in total, I think it can be moved to PDEPEND. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Apart from PDEPEND, one change needed as well in cups ebuilds: |
| 17 |
--with-pdftops pdftops |
| 18 |
needs to be replaced with |
| 19 |
--with-pdftops=/usr/bin/pdftops |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
as otherwise it will fail during configure phase (giving absolute path |
| 22 |
disables autodetection) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
cups can use either poppler or ghostscript as pdf-to-ps filter, so given the |
| 25 |
fact that ghostscript is already a dep of cups, maybe --with-pdftops=gs could |
| 26 |
be used instead to avoid poppler dependency completely, but that's up to cups |
| 27 |
maintainers to determine whether it's safe/desired. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
So it's all simple, all this fuzz was unnecessary. |
| 30 |
Btw, do we still have active printing herd? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
regards |
| 34 |
MM |
Archives