Re: gdk-pixbuf external conversion?

[Lauris Kaplinski <lauris kaplinski com>]

On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:

> >>>>> In article <20000617205824.A488@yakk.net.au>, Ian McKellar <yakk-gnome-devel@yakk.net.au> writes:
> 
>     Ian> On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 02:55:00PM +0200, Lauris Kaplinski wrote:
>     >> 
>     >> The screenshooter uses excellent application (convert?) to do all its
>     >> conversion. IMHO something such should be semi-standard part of gnome
>     >> itself, maybe as part of bigger file conversion framework.
> 
>     Ian> No!
> 
>     Ian> Down that path there is much pain and suffering. convert will sometimes
>     Ian> halt indefinately. It also doesn't solve the right problem. If we adopt
>     Ian> this then nobody will write loaders for gdk-pixbuf.
> 
>     Ian> Ian [whose system is often haunted by convert and xcftopnm processes]
> 
> The advantage of using a legacy module rather than an external program
> is that the legacy module will likely be compatible with the actual
> library (if distributed together), while external programs could be
> incompatible depending on the version used.

Hmmm...

cat some_image | converter_app > same_image_but_now.png

Little possibility for incompatibilities, I think :)
command line arguments maybe...
I do not deny that modules make more sense for many file formats. But it
is mostly impossible to have module for EVERY file format, without using
external apps + wrapper modules.
Take PS for example. It would take long time (probably, although maybe we
implement that in gnome print) before anybody would do gdk_pixbuf module
for PostScript - and it would need different interface, because it has to
specify page size / pixel resolution. Yet sometimes it would be useful to
have such beast - and it is perfectly diable, using GS :)

Lauris