On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Joris van der Hoeven
<address@hidden> wrote:
Hi Michael,
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 04:10:24PM +0200, Michael Lachmann wrote:
> I'm not sure if you already went through the whole pile of texmacs-dev mails... I just wanted to see what you think about the hack I posted below. I have been using this for around 1.5 months, and it seems to work quite well. Images load MUCH faster than before. I think that the cache handling is probably better handled from inside TeXmacs instead of by an external script as I do. In any case I think it is a good idea not to have the image conversion ps-to-png hard-coded into TeXmacs.
> (Instead of what is written below, because of feedback from the mailing list, I put the image cache in .TeXmacs/system/cache/images, and the CRC is separated into letters with a directory for each letter. Its current size for me, after 1.5 months of use is 13M. )
Yes, I agree that we should use an image cache for this kind of thing,
even though more control over the cache would indeed be a good thing.
Could you send me a complete patch, if possible with doing the caching
from inside TeXmacs and using a safe mechanism for cache names?
Notice also that the -dEPSCrop option of ghostscript does not work
if there is a non trivial offset. For this reason, I just hacked
the code so as to use ImageMagick in that case.
Good... because the generated .eps from gs>9.0 are massive but imagemagick does a decent job. (gs folks will add an epswrite target sometime later).