--- David Neèas (Yeti) <yeti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 27, 2006 at 03:13:19PM -0700, Sergei Steshenko wrote: > > > > 1) items like FT_FREETYPE_H, i.e. items without the encapsulating '"' or > > '<', '>' are meant to be macros; > > Correct. > > > 2) the above macros used to be defined in > > > > freetype/config/ftheader.h > > freetype/internal/internal.h > > > > files; > > Correct. > > However, these are FreeType headers, not fontconfig headers. > FreeType 2.2+ installs ftheader.h as usual, but it does not > install internal.h any more. > > > 3) the above .h files are not within the source tarball anymore - here is > > my check of this statement: > > > > " > > [31] 0:19 sergei@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:/mnt/removable4/sergei/build_work/build> find fontconfig-2.3.2 > > -name "*.h" > > fontconfig-2.3.2/src/fcint.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fontconfig/fontconfig.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fontconfig/fcfreetype.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fontconfig/fcprivate.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-case/fccase.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-case/fccase.tmpl.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-lang/fclang.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-lang/fclang.tmpl.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-glyphname/fcglyphname.h > > fontconfig-2.3.2/fc-glyphname/fcglyphname.tmpl.h > > [32] 1:06 sergei@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:/mnt/removable4/sergei/build_work/build> > > " > > > > - indeed they are not in the tarball. > > Indeed they do not belong to *fontconfig* source tarball. > > > fontconfig-2.3.2.tar.gz can NOT be compiled because some header files > > (namely freetype/config/ftheader.h, freetype/internal/internal.h) are > > missing in it > > No; if you have FreeType installed, you have ftheader.h. > But if it's version 2.2+ you do not have internal.h which > fontconfig uses too and therefore it does not compile. > > Have you tried to apply > > http://freetype.sourceforge.net/freetype2/patches/fontconfig-2.3.2-noftinternals.patch > > ? > > Yeti > > > -- > Anonyms eat their boogers. > _______________________________________________ > gtk-list mailing list > gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list > I haven't yet tried http://freetype.sourceforge.net/freetype2/patches/fontconfig-2.3.2-noftinternals.patch . But my point is this: 1) the world is a mess; 2) to deal with the above mess 'configure' (autoconf, automake) were invented; 3) 'configure' is supposed to check all prerequisites - if they are in place, 'configure' should complete successfully (0 exit status); 4) if 'configure' completes successfully, 'make' should just work. In this case ( https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7862 ) 'configure' did complete successfully, but 'make' failed. So, that's why I consider this to be a bug. I.e., I'm taking a tarball, I run 'configure', 'configure' does not complain about anything, but 'make' fails. I didn't find anything in the tarball about patches. So, to me it looks like the fontconfig team released a tarball which can't be compiled using the documented by the fontconfig team way, which happens to be standard UNIX ./configure make make install way. Because the source can't be compiled using the documented by the authors' team way, it's a bug - rememebr, 'configure' does not complain and exists with 0 status. ... Regarding the http://freetype.sourceforge.net/freetype2/patches/fontconfig-2.3.2-noftinternals.patch patch - it appears to affect these files: fcfreetype.c fcftglue.c fcftglue.h Makefile.am Makefile.in files. Because of Makefile.am, Makefile.in files - is it correct to assume that the patch should be applied before 'configure' is run ? Thanks, Sergei. Applications From Scratch: http://appsfromscratch.berlios.de/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
