On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 12:13:27PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Andre> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 03:30:17PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote: > >> I set it to false because it seemed that this was wanted, but it is > >> not needed. We can of course decide that -x wants a gui. The > >> problem is that there are some cases where -x needs a gui and > >> others where it does not. Does it hurt to use a gui even if none is > >> needed? Then we could revert that part of the change, the bug fix > >> was at another place. > > Andre> What about an explicit '--no-gui' command line option? > > The problem is that we do not really know which lfuns require a GUI.
That's why the user should specify --no-gui on the command line if he doesn't want a gui and we should then try to works without one or bomb if this is impossible. Andre'
