On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 09:38:04AM -0400, Johnny C. Lam wrote:
> Good point.  In retrospect, keeping the interactive program with the
> old name makes more sense.  I see two choices:
> 
> 	1) gsx11 -> gs, and gs -> gsnoX/gstty (any other good names??)
> 
> 	2) Make gs a shell script that parses its arguments looking for
> 	   -sDEVICE=x11* and calls ${PREFIX}/libexec/[gs|gsx11]
> 	   appropriately.
> 
> Which is better?

I'm not sure the shell script is a good idea. Hiding from the user that there
are 2 gs binaries can eventually leave to confusion.
For example, 'gs -h' returns the available devices; which one will you
run is this case ?
So I'd really prefer 1)

--
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
--