http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896 Stefan Brüns changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- See Also| |http://bugzilla.opensuse.or | |g/show_bug.cgi?id=1074267 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c2 --- Comment #2 from Stefan Brüns --- (In reply to Johannes Meixner from comment #1) [...]

All I could do is to close this issue as WONTFIX regardless that this issue is of course perfectly valid, cf. https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/page.cgi?id=status_resolution_matrix.html

Thanks for not closing it ;-) I already have started doing some changes to the package to address the issues, but having you as a reviewer would be very welcome. As addressing all the issues would create quite some churn in the package, would you prefer a series of smaller SRs preferably addressing only one issue each, or just one/a few larger SRs? One problem for me would be testing with real hardware, i.e. ghostscript as printer driver. I only have one ink jet printer and one (PS) laser printer, so I could hardly test it. So for IJS, I could probably make it compile, but not test it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c4 --- Comment #4 from Johannes Meixner --- Stefan Brüns your contributions to improve the ghostscript package are very much appreciated. Many thanks in advance for it! Regarding --disable-compile-inits see https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/Printing/ghostscript/ghostscrip... why I had "Removed --disable-compile-inits from configure" on "Thu Sep 24 10:29:04 CEST 2015" because of http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=696223 At that time I had a conversation with Chris Liddell because on the gs-devel mailing list under the subject "Ghostrscript/GhostPDL 9.18 Release Candidate 1" see https://ghostscript.com/pipermail/gs-devel/2015-September/009813.html and the subsequent mails in this mail thread. Since that time (Sep. 2015) I got only one single user report who has an issue because of the removed --disable-compile-inits https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1057979 His issue is basically what Chris Liddell explained in https://ghostscript.com/pipermail/gs-devel/2015-September/009816.html that with --disable-compile-inits users can of course not customize Ghostscript's required stuff. But on the other hand this also means users can not mess up what Ghostscript needs to run and already at that time (Sep. 2015) I had no time at all to deal with any possible issues of users who had messed up what Ghostscript needs to run, cf. "My current reasoning" in https://ghostscript.com/pipermail/gs-devel/2015-September/009815.html This all boils down to that I do not have time for Ghostscript issues so that I preferred to provide a big and fat self contained Ghostscript that "just works" to our users over possible "optimizations". I think experienced users who really need a customized Ghostscript can sufficiently easily use our openSUSE Build Service to build their own Ghostscript as they need it for their particular use-case. Simply put: The more a single piece of software is split into smaller parts the more interdependencies one has to continuously maintain and the more issues can happen and will happen (Murphy's Law). Of course this is only my personal point of view. Others rightfully prefer to have a single piece of software split into smaller parts to get more flexibility what to install and how to combine all those pieces together. I would be totally happy with that if it was not me who has to continuously maintain all those bits and pieces. Stefan Brüns what all this means in the end is: Re-enabling --disable-compile-inits is perfectly fine with me as long as it is not me who has to deal with possibly resulting issues because of that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c6 --- Comment #6 from Johannes Meixner --- There is also https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/580811 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description: - Add ghostscript-fix-debug-use.patch from upstream to fix broken printing with some drivers (especially Fuji Xerox and Dell Printers) from https://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=698837 - Fix build for SLE targets Actions: - submit home:FunkyM:branches:Printing/ghostscript => Printing/ghostscript ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c8 --- Comment #8 from Johannes Meixner --- FYI: I am not in the office until next Monday so I ask you to be patient... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c10 Johannes Meixner changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |IN_PROGRESS URL| |https://build.opensuse.org/ | |request/show/581052 --- Comment #10 from Johannes Meixner --- No objections from others means it is o.k. for everybody so that I did; ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- $ osc request accept 581052 --message="ok for me, see boo#1082896 in particular http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c9" Result of change request state: ok openSUSE:Factory Forward this submit to it? ([y]/n)n ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- FYI: As always I did not directly forward changes to openSUSE:Factory. I let it stay for the default time in the Printing project so that interested users could try it out from there (I know there are interested users "out there" who do that). This way we could get issue reports early before all Factory/Tumbleweed users might be hit by an issue. After some default time there is an automated forwarding submitrequest to openSUSE:Factory. Stefan Brüns, when you consider this issue to be sufficiently solved by your https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/581052 I would like to close it as fixed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c13 --- Comment #13 from Stefan Brüns --- (In reply to Johannes Meixner from comment #10)

No objections from others means it is o.k. for everybody so that I did; ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- $ osc request accept 581052 --message="ok for me, see boo#1082896 in particular http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c9" Result of change request state: ok openSUSE:Factory Forward this submit to it? ([y]/n)n ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the review and so on ...

Stefan Brüns, when you consider this issue to be sufficiently solved by your https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/581052 I would like to close it as fixed.

The package is an a better state now, but there are still some things to improve: 1. ghostscript-fonts-std is not required, the Base35 fonts are part of the Resource in the tarball (trivial) 2. ghostscript-fonts-other contain Bitream Charter, Adobe Utopia, URW Antiqua, URW Grotesq and Hershey fonts, all but the last are also provided by texlive-<name>-fonts. Anyway, it is not required for PS compliance, so should probably reduced to Recommends or even Suggests. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1082896#c15 --- Comment #15 from Johannes Meixner --- Stefan Brüns many thanks for all your valuable help and contributions! I updated Ghostscript 9.23rc1 in OBS Printing accordingly: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- $ osc submitrequest -m 'Ghostscript 9.23rc1 uses lcms2 from SUSE and \ does no longer require any fonts packages (boo#1082896)' \ home:jsmeix:branches:Printing ghostscript Printing ghostscript created request id 587895 $ osc request accept ... 587895 Result of change request state: ok openSUSE:Factory Forward this submit to it? ([y]/n)n -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Some quick tests on my openSUSE Leap 42.3 seem to work o.k. also without ghostscript-fonts-std and ghostscript-fonts-other. Using lcms2 from SUSE instead of what Ghostscript provides is a bit unexpected because usually what Ghostscript provides is intentionally provided by Ghostscript because Ghostscript needs some specific adaptions and enhancements to make things work as intended by Ghostscript which means not using what Ghostscript provides can result issues at our users i.e. things may "just build" for us but also "just fail" (in this or that cases) for our users. But using lcms2 from SUSE instead of what Ghostscript provides is an exception because that is what Ghostscript recommends https://ghostscript.com/pipermail/gs-devel/2018-March/010061.html But also note that using lcms2 from SUSE is not meant forever so that at some later time we should switch back to using what Ghostscript provides according to what the ghostscript-9.23rc1 source file doc/News.htm reads: "We will maintain compatibility between Ghostscript and LCMS2 for a time, but not in perpetuity." -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.