Re: Bug #1503114

[<tim...@en...>]

Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> Ethan Merritt wrote:
>  =20
>
>>   - Does Windows truly require the PostScript prolog files to
>>     be moved back into the driver source?
>>    =20
>
> Well, maybe not.  But if there is any chance of too much confusion with=
 the patch because of something we haven't tested much yet, perhaps move =
the code back into post.trm and immediately move it back out after 4.2.
>
> What is the amount of confidence at this point regarding the possibilit=
y of a lot of bug reports "postscript not viewable"?
>  =20
With the current code, 99% of chance of getting the error "Can't find=20
PostScript prologue file" out-of-the-box when using the postscript=20
terminal on Windows and other non-Unix platforms.

Two alternatives :
1- Move them back to the source file (the GNUPLOT_PS_DIR environment=20
variable can be conserved for flexibility)
2- Use a platform-specific strategy :
    * UNIX : let the code as it is now
    * Windows : look for those files in share/Postscript/  relatively to=20
the executable path using getModuleFilename()
    * others : include them in the source file at compile time

Timoth=E9e