[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems
From: |
David Turner |
Subject: |
Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems |
Date: |
Thu, 9 Nov 2000 23:58:29 +0100 |
Hi Stefan,
>
> I understand the problem of conflicting headers. And I think a perfect
> solution is to
> let the user decide where to install freetype(2). That should of course be
> reflected
> by freetype-config.
>
If the user only uses "freetype-config" appropriately, it doesn't need to
even worry about the location, and can already choose to install it where
it wants.
We could add a switch to the configure script to disable the
"freetype2/freetype"
trick (in this case, the library headers would be installed in
$(prefix)/include/freetype
as yesterday).
What's important is to never assume this location for obvious portability
reasons..
Always use "freetype-config", even if you disabled the "freetype2/freetype"
trick,
this will keep your program portable among different installations..
> That being said, I don't see a need for the subdirectory 'freetype2'. Either,
> the user
> already uses an older freetype version, at which point he could just install
> freetype2
> elsewhere, or he does not, than it doesn't matter anyway. May be the Makefile
> could check
> for an existing freetype installation and warn about it. I'd guess that not
> many people
> will use both versions anyway...
>
The FT2 Makefile could check for a FT1 installation. The FT1 Makefile will not
check for a FT2 installation .. :-(
> Of course, there is still a theoretical problem, which appears if you'd need
> to work with
> both versions in the same project, i.e. you'd need be sure that the
> preprocessor chooses
> the right '-I' statement for the right file. But that seems purely
> academical, as no-one will
> ever use freetype 1 and freetype 2 in the same project.
>
I'm pretty certain that the conflict is _not_ academical, given that one of my
colleagues ran into it today when trying to install the library on its system
and compile a bunch of various utilities..
You need distinct directories, and FT1 is hard-coded to "freetype"
> Regards, Stefan
>
> PS: for binary packages, I'd suggest to pay attention that they are
> relocatable (rpm, deb),
> to avoid aforementioned conflict.
>
That's an excellent suggestion. Unfortunately, I'm not knowledgeable in the
package management fields. I'd appreciate if someone could provide some
spec files ??
Regards,
- David
- [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems, David Turner, 2000/11/09
- Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems, Werner LEMBERG, 2000/11/09
- Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems, Werner LEMBERG, 2000/11/09
- Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems, David Turner, 2000/11/09
- Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems, Werner LEMBERG, 2000/11/09
- Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems, Ramiro Estrugo, 2000/11/12
- [Freetype] Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems, ramiro, 2000/11/22