>> If FreeType2 building system supports a case that a developer
>> extracts the harfbuzz source to some directory and build at same
>> time (I think such style is popular for the people making cross
>> build toolchain at once: binutils + gcc), it would be acceptable
>> improvement?
The main question is: Is it *really* worth the hassle?
> Actually, it is exactly the case a friend has, and I am asking this
> question for him because he is a bit busy. He is working on an
> installer for Windows. But it seems that the design of his
> installer makes difficult to resolve the circular dep with the 3
> steps mentioned above.
This would be an excellent opportunity to improve his installer :-)
Note that it isn't a real circular dependency, since FreeType works
just fine without HarfBuzz; it just has limited auto-hinter module.
I suggest that you look around how other building systems (like
Homebrew for OS X) are resolving the issue. IIRC, some provide two
FreeType packages with different build flags:
freetype-simple -> harfbuzz
harfbuzz -> freetype-complete
where freetype-complete simply overwrites the freetype-simple library
after installation.
> so if Freetype2 supports the extraction of harfbuzz source code and
> build it, it would indeed solve his problem
Basically, I don't object if this gets done in a clean way, this is,
without increasing the FreeType library size and having manageable
code that doesn't need to be updated constantly if HarfBuzz evolves.
However, I won't be able to work on this (and my interest is quite
limited, admittedly). Any volunteers welcomed!
Werner
_______________________________________________
Freetype-devel mailing list
Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
