[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c
From: |
Behdad Esfahbod |
Subject: |
Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c |
Date: |
Sat, 12 Jan 2013 01:36:48 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 |
On 13-01-11 02:02 AM, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> Not yet, sorry. IMHO the first step for the next release is to
> comment out the line
>
> #define FT_CONFIG_OPTION_OLD_INTERNALS
>
> in `ftoption.h' so that the old internals are still available but no
> longer activated by default. I've done that right now.
Did you push it to master? I don't see.
--
behdad
http://behdad.org/
- [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Behdad Esfahbod, 2013/01/10
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, David Turner, 2013/01/10
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Behdad Esfahbod, 2013/01/10
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Behdad Esfahbod, 2013/01/10
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/01/11
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/01/11
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Behdad Esfahbod, 2013/01/11
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/01/12
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Behdad Esfahbod, 2013/01/12
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c,
Behdad Esfahbod <=
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/01/12
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Behdad Esfahbod, 2013/01/12
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Werner LEMBERG, 2013/01/12
- Re: [ft-devel] ttsbit.c vs ttsbit0.c, Behdad Esfahbod, 2013/01/12