Re: [RFC] Even on freez does this bug need to go to ghostscript ?
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> wrote:
> On 12-07-24 at 06:36pm, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
>> I have made a past for ghostscript that will ease the debugging of
>> ghostscript problem.
>>
>> Instead of printing numeric error ghostscript will print
>> strerror(error).
>>
>> It is a one liner quite safe because code path is tested on dos and
>> windows (please do not laugth).
>>
>> Now:
>> * do you think this patch is worthwhile ?
>> * do you think we could convince the release team to get it [1].
>
> I think it sounds like a good idea, but do not see it as crucial and
> prefer if you could persuade upstream to adopt it and not carry a local
> patch for it.
Already patched upstream. See but about unhelful message
> ...and I do not see it as important for a freeze exception, but don't
> mind you trying, if you insist.
Will try
Bastien
>
> - Jonas
>
> --
> * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
> * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
>
> [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Reply to: