On Wed, 2004-08-18 at 11:28, Tim Waugh wrote: > On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 11:07:22AM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:50:57 +0100, Tim Waugh wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 10:40:18AM +0200, Andreas Mueller wrote: > > > > > > > I wanted to update my FC1 text-only installation. The new ghostscript > > > > package (7.07-15.4) requires gdk-pixbuf and gtk+ to be installed. Why > > > > is that? Is it just an error in packaging or are there other reasons? > > > > > > After all the fuss people made about needing libgs.so for FC1, it > > > seems that virtually no-one tested the packages. Wrong. It's just that those people who tested did not make a fuss about ghostscript requiring gdk-pixbuf and gtk+. If it requires gdk-pixbuf and gtk+, so be it. Where is the problem? > > Was the update released on user feedback or after a time-out? > > (It's gsx which requires gtk+/gdk.) > > Both: I left it at least a week, and required at least some positive > feedback. I know that at least one person tested it to some extent. And this person (me) did as he said above. > I think this is something I'm going to have to let the Fedora Legacy > project address if need be -- but I do wish that I hadn't started down > this path in the first place. > > Sorry for the mess. Which mess? ghostscript/FC2 requires gtk2 and gdk_pixbuf2, ghostscript/FC1 requires their gtk1 counterparts, where is the problem? Ralf
