[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug-gv] Re: Security issues

From: Bernhard R. Link
Subject: Re: [bug-gv] Re: Security issues
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 10:34:12 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

* address@hidden <address@hidden> [100531 00:09]:
> Should not gv use the provided pdf2dsc script, instead of relying on
> "internal" gs bits? (The gs people might re-design the whole thing, not
> use a single pdf2dsc.ps file or just rename that.) If gv relies on
> internals, then it might as well keep track of installed gs version.

The question simply is:
Is pdf2dsc.ps an internal and pdf2dsc the official interface.
Or is pdf2dsc.ps the offical interface and pdf2dsc simply a convenient
helper script.

> Yes, it would be good if gs was "properly" designed. Still, gv should
> not use "gs internals" but only provided/supported interfaces.

Again, which is the provided interface? In my understanding the scripts
are mostly convient helpers around the official interface.

> (Maybe copy/steal that file, and have it as part of gv?)

I think that file may likely change over the gs versions and not work
with other ones. So I think one should use the correct one.

        Bernhard R. Link

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]