On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 01:41, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote: > At 02:02 PM 4/22/2003 -0400, you wrote: > >On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 12:09, Christopher Wong wrote: > > > Why am I even bothering with this? Hint: Red Hat's freetype is crippled. > > > TrueType fonts look much better -- with or without antialiasing -- when > > > bytecode interpretation is turned on. I know the usual explanation: patent > > > question, CYA, yadda, yadda. > > > >You're making life difficult on yourself. Just download the freetype > >SRPM, install it with rpm -i, and turn on the bytecode interpreter with > >a simple change to the spec file. (I'm pretty sure it's the very first > >thing in the spec file, something like %define > >without_bytecode_interpreter). Then just rebuild from the spec file > >(rpmbuild -bb freetype.spec) . No need to bother with the freetype > >source tarball, which as you point out does things somewhat differently > >than the Red Hat SRPM. > > Do we know why Red Hat does it this way in the binary RPM? And what change > is required to enable it? Change "without" to "with", or comment out the > line, or what? > Sorry, I thought it was obvious what the change is. The line says this: %define without_bytecode_interpreter 1 You need to change it to this: %define without_bytecode_interpreter 0 As in most languages, the RPM spec file format recognizes 0 as boolean false and 1 as boolean true. There is also a comment in the specfile that clearly identifies this. They really couldn't make it any easier! --Jeremy -- /=====================================================================\ | Jeremy Portzer jeremyp@xxxxxxxxx trilug.org/~jeremy | | GPG Fingerprint: 712D 77C7 AB2D 2130 989F E135 6F9F F7BC CC1A 7B92 | \=====================================================================/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
