Ghostscript vs. `xps'

Article View: gnu.ghostscript.bug

Article #201

Back to gnu.ghostscript.bug Previous Next

#201

From: Dirk Grunwald
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1989 18:13

10 lines
941 bytes

Does anyone have both `ghostscript' and `xps' [with speedups, etc]
running? Care to offer any commentary on e.g., completeness
of implementation, speed and the like?

I never got 1.3 to compile, so I rm'd the source. I've been using
`xps' to preview postscript figures for a paper. Eventually, I'd
like to make a postscript widget. Which would be the better base?
--
Dirk Grunwald -- Univ. of Illinois 		  (grunwald@flute.cs.uiuc.edu)

Technical Details

Message-ID: <GRUNWALD.89Jul27131056@flute.cs.uiuc.edu>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!flute.cs.uiuc.edu!grunwald

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!flute.cs.uiuc.edu!grunwald
From: grunwald@flute.cs.uiuc.edu (Dirk Grunwald)
Newsgroups: gnu.ghostscript.bug,comp.windows.x
Subject: Ghostscript vs. `xps'
Message-ID: <GRUNWALD.89Jul27131056@flute.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 27 Jul 89 18:13:09 GMT
Sender: news@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: grunwald@flute.cs.uiuc.edu
Distribution: gnu
Organization: University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Lines: 10