Re: Lightweight alternative to imagemagick?
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 08:41:55 -0600, Kumar Appaiah (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 07:40:37AM -0500, Paul Cartwright wrote:
> > > I want to resize jpeg images (in order to create thumbnail images for a
> > > webpage) from a bash script and know that I can use 'convert' from the
> > > imagemagick package to achieve this. This will be run on a (headless,
> > > no X) lenny/armel NSLU2 "slug".
> > GIMP ships with a second binary called gimp-console. This binary is a
> > console-only version and behaves as if gimp was called with the
> > --no-interface command-line option.
> I think you refer to gimp-console. Does it solve the OPs problem of
> Imagemagick being too heavy? I suspect that installing Gimp will also
> pull in several X and GTK+ based dependencies which offer little value
> on a Slug...
Thank you for the suggestion Paul, but you are right Kumar: Gimp wanted to
pull in nearly 70 packages totalling 107MB.
> As for other options, I cannot think of any myself. However, I suspect
> that while Imagemagick convert will stress your SLUG a little, it
> might still do the job for you as long as you don't run much else on
> the Slug...
As it happens I have gone ahead and installed imagemagick and it works
fine. I just wanted to avoid installing what seems like unnecessary
packages. They won't actually be doing anything and I am not short of
disk space, so really it does not matter at all I suppose.
The slug is kept busy running motion (movement detecting with a webcam)
and saving the resulting images. Using convert from imagemagick to
reduce these images for viewing on a webpage will only add a bit more
Bob Cox. Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.
Please reply to the list only. Do NOT send copies directly to me.
Debian on the NSLU2: http://bobcox.com/slug/