Re: Packaging ghostscript's X11 support separately
On 18 December 2014 at 17:57, Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2014-12-18 20:20 GMT+03:00 Tim Waugh <twaugh(a)redhat.com>:
> I could package it in its own sub-package, ghostscript-x11, but that
> might be a bit surprising to people who expect 'ghostscript' to have an
> x11alpha driver.
>
> Alternatively I could move everything else from ghostscript to a new
> sub-package ghostscript-base, and have 'ghostscript' (i.e. just the
> X11.so plugin) require ghostscript-base (i.e. everything else).
The latter approach (ghostscript depending on *-core and *-x11/gui) is
better. it won't break any installations while providing enough
flexibility for the new ones.
... but has the downside that many packages will need to change their
Requires from ghostscript to ghostscript-core to prevent them from
pulling in the X stack.