Re: [ft-devel] Mac install instructions don't seem to exist

[David Turner]

Hi all,

> I think the support status of Mac OS X is almost same with
> most Unix shipped with partial GNU environment.
> Most of tools in Xcode are Apple modified version that are
> based on GNU tools released 1 or 2 years ago. Thus, on Mac
> OS X, we cannot build simply as we can do on GNU/Linux which
> full-featured GNU tools are preinstalled.
> 
Also, many Linux distributions don't ship with an up-to-date
automake tools which make them unable to build the CVS package
as well. I'm thinking about Debian and Ubuntu Dapper (and
possibly Edgy as well)

> So, if required, improvement of configure, builds/unix/configure.raw
> and docs/INSTALL.UNIX are appropriate in principle. At present,
> configure (not builds/unix/configure) has a hook to ascertain
> whether make is GNU make /or not. I think, putting detailed
> version check into configure is the simplest improvement.
> Or, the documentation improvement is better? Werner, please
> let me know your thought.
> 
Very good idea, but how do we check for these in a portable way ?

Regards,

- David Turner
- The FreeType Project  (www.freetype.org)


> Sean, except of GNU make version, there's any issues that
> configure, builds/unix/configure and INSTALL.UNIX have not
> covered yet?
> 
> --
> 
> About the documentation for developers checking CVS source:
> README.CVS.
> 
> >> I must say it's pretty strange that a project like freetype (which
> >> includes Mac-specific code) does not build with the development
> >> tools that come with the OS.
> >
> >It does.
> 
> I think it's not strange: source on CVS is for developer
> with full-featured GNU environment, not for building like
> "./configure && make && make install". The developers using
> systems with partial GNU environment, like vanilla FreeBSD,
> have to setup their environment - as I've written in above.
> 
> >> Could autogen.sh be conditionalised to include Chirstian's hack?
> >
> >No.  You are actually using a developer's version (the CVS), thus you
> >have to be prepared to use the latest tools in case .  On the other
> >hand, a `public' tarball comes with a generated configure script; in
> >that case you neither need automake nor autoconf at all.
> 
> In my personal opinion, putting some hooks to check autotools
> versions into autogen.sh is not bad idea. However, even if I add
> such hook to autogen.sh, it simply requests the versions listed
> in README.CVS, I'm not going to find the oldest "working" version
> of autotools.
> 
> Regards,
> mpsuzuki
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Freetype-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel