Hi,
In the conventional workflow, the source tree of the FreeType2 library
has "./configure", but freetype-demos does not have. Just starting
"make" with existing Makefile under "freetype-demos" carries the
configured values from freetype directory. The meson for the ftinspect
wants to confirm additional libraries, like Qt5 (you can find the
declaration of the dependency in src/ftinspect/meson.build).
If somebody wants to try to make autotools to support the building
of Qt5-based ftinspect, new configure should be added to freetype-demos,
to check the availability of the extra libraries for ftinspect?
Or, such check should be added to existing freetype/configure, even
if libfreetype itself has no dependency with them?
Regards,
mpsuzuki
On 2023/07/11 1:10, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
If ftinspect and, potentially, other software is not going to be
built via autotools, is there a case to move to another build
system?
Well, yes. Meson will eventually become the main tool for building
FreeType, I think (or rather, it definitely won't become CMake as the
default). However, cleaning up the build system was/is a GSoC
project, so nobody else touched it in earnest. In particular, I am
not a specialist for Meson; additionally, Meson itself is still quite
a moving target.
That's a bit unsatisfactory. Personally I only use the autotools/make
to build. Also as far as I know, last I heard there is(was?) a bug of
ttdebug being mis-built by meson - it is missing a -DUNIX or something
of that sort to control the command buffering.
Yep, https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/freetype/freetype-demos/-/issues/24
I sort of feel like raising it from time to time when the GSoC
students are updating the build system "have a look at fixing that
too..." but ultimately it sounds like dumping uninteresting/tedious
work on young people.
It seems so, unfortunately.
I think Werner would respond at some point writing "patches welcome"
for building ftinspect with autotools :-).
You are reading my mind :-)
Werner