On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, A. Costa wrote: > % ls -log > total 32554 > -rw-r----- 1 16638693 Jun 14 2005 Jettaradio0001.png > -rw-r----- 1 16562597 Jun 14 2005 Jettaradio0002.png > % pngcrush * > [...] > Recompressing Jettaradio0001.png > [...] > Best pngcrush method = 9 (fm 5 zl 2 zs 2) for Jettaradio0002.png > [...] > > 'pngcrush' examined the first file, and overwrote the second with an > optimized compression of the first. Result: two files with different > names and the same image data, while the original second file's image > data was deleted. > > Yet it's not obvious from the standard output quoted above what > had been done. The part that says "for Jettaradio0002.png" seems > confusing. Suggested wording: > > Best pngcrush method = 9 (fm 5 zl 2 zs 2) output to Jettaradio0002.png
Actually, some users have complained that "pngcrush" is too verbose and should actually not say anything at all while doing its job! Perhaps this verbosity should be turned on by a command-line switch. When we enable that we could also change the message as suggested. Regards, Kapil. --
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
