Re: [ft-devel] last fixes for forthcoming release
In module.cfg, gxvalid, otvalid, ftgxval are disabled, but ftotval is enabled. I think ftgxval and ftotval are thin wrappers to provide public interface of gxvalid and otvalid modules. The interface functions in ftgxval and ftotval return errors safely, when libfreetype is built without gxvalid and otvalid. So, I think, ftgxval/ftotval should be enabled always, [...] I agree. Please change this. But, now I found that modules.cfg disables ftgxval. ft2demos/Makefile should be capable for such cases? Maybe, but I think it's not an urgent problem. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Duplicate messages [was Re: [ft-devel] last fixes for forthcoming release]
Steve Langasek wrote: FWIW, I've gotten upwards of 5 copies of every message sent to this list over the past few days, and I know I only subscribed once. :) Is that also a known issue? I started getting at least 10 copies of each message earlier this week, but that has dropped to one or two duplicates arriving each day. But I still am getting duplicates. -- --- Mark Leisher Computing Research Lab In the republic of mediocrity, New Mexico State Universitygenius is dangerous. Box 30001, MSC 3CRL-- Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899) Las Cruces, NM 88003 ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] last fixes for forthcoming release
Hi, On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 22:57:13 +0100 (CET) Werner LEMBERG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The interface functions in ftgxval and ftotval return errors safely, when libfreetype is built without gxvalid and otvalid. So, I think, ftgxval/ftotval should be enabled always, [...] I agree. Please change this. Thank you, I changed ftgxval.c in modules.cfg by default. But, now I found that modules.cfg disables ftgxval. ft2demos/Makefile should be capable for such cases? Maybe, but I think it's not an urgent problem. Following is my idea: 1. ft2demos/Makefile includes modules.cfg to check whether ftgxval.c and ftotval.c are built /or not. 2. Rule to build ftvalid is quoted by conditionals. Index: Makefile === RCS file: /cvsroot/freetype/ft2demos/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.33 diff -u -r1.33 Makefile --- Makefile1 Feb 2006 21:17:54 - 1.33 +++ Makefile28 Feb 2006 01:27:48 - @@ -36,6 +36,20 @@ endif +## +# +# MODULES_CFG points to the current `modules.cfg' to use. It is defined +# by default as $(TOP_DIR)/modules.cfg. +# +ifndef MODULES_CFG + MODULES_CFG := $(TOP_DIR)/modules.cfg +endif + +ifeq ($(wildcard $(MODULES_CFG)),) + no_modules_cfg := 1 +endif + + # # Check that we have a working `config.mk' in the above directory. @@ -62,6 +76,10 @@ # include $(CONFIG_MK) + ifndef no_modules_cfg +include $(MODULES_CFG) + endif + have_makefile := $(strip $(wildcard Makefile)) ifeq ($(PLATFORM),unix) @@ -229,11 +247,20 @@ # # The list of demonstration programs to build. # - EXES := ftlint ftmemchk ftdump testname fttimer ftbench ftchkwd ftvalid + EXES := ftlint ftmemchk ftdump testname fttimer ftbench ftchkwd # Comment out the next line if you don't have a graphics subsystem. EXES += ftview ftmulti ftstring ftgamma + # ftvalid requires ftgxval.c and ftotval.c + # + ifneq ($(findstring ftgxval.c,$(BASE_EXTENSIONS)),) +ifneq ($(findstring ftotval.c,$(BASE_EXTENSIONS)),) + EXES += ftvalid +endif + endif + + # Only uncomment the following lines if the truetype driver was # compiled with TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER defined. # ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] last fixes for forthcoming release
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 07:22:26AM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote: I think it should be : \ftccache.c around line #259 #ifdef FT_CONFIG_OPTION_OLD_INTERNALS FT_BASE( void ) #else FT_LOCAL( void ) #endif ftc_node_destroy( FTC_Node node, FTC_Manager manager ) Exactly. Meanwhile this code is already in the list -- due to the extreme lags which are currently happening on all gnu.org (and nongnu.org) mailing lists, I've fixed this independently on your report. Accordingly to an announcement on savannah.gnu.org, the problems with the mailing lists will continue this month, so please be prepared that messages appear with delays of a day or greater. FWIW, I've gotten upwards of 5 copies of every message sent to this list over the past few days, and I know I only subscribed once. :) Is that also a known issue? Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] last fixes for forthcoming release
I think it should be : \ftccache.c around line #259 #ifdef FT_CONFIG_OPTION_OLD_INTERNALS FT_BASE( void ) #else FT_LOCAL( void ) #endif ftc_node_destroy( FTC_Node node, FTC_Manager manager ) Exactly. Meanwhile this code is already in the list -- due to the extreme lags which are currently happening on all gnu.org (and nongnu.org) mailing lists, I've fixed this independently on your report. Accordingly to an announcement on savannah.gnu.org, the problems with the mailing lists will continue this month, so please be prepared that messages appear with delays of a day or greater. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] last fixes for forthcoming release
Hi Sorry for my inactivity for the urgent tasks to release freetype-2.2.. Just I've tested cvs HEAD on GNU/Linux and MacOSX 10.4., and I'm afraid that gcc-4.x cannot build ftccache.c. I received complains aslike: gcc -pedantic -ansi -I/Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/objs \ -I./builds/unix -I/Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/include \ -c -Wall -g -O2 -DFT_CONFIG_OPTION_SYSTEM_ZLIB -DHAVE_FSSPEC=1 \ -DHAVE_FSREF=1 -DHAVE_QUICKDRAW_TOOLBOX=1 -DHAVE_QUICKDRAW_CARBON=1 \ -DHAVE_ATS=1 -DFT_CONFIG_CONFIG_H=ftconfig.h -DFT2_BUILD_LIBRARY \ -DFT_CONFIG_MODULES_H=ftmodule.h \ -I/Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/src/cache \ /Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/src/cache/ftcache.c \ -fno-common -DPIC -o \ /Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/objs/.libs/ftcache.o In file included from /Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/src/cache/ftcache.c:24: /Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/src/cache/ftccache.c:262: error: static declaration of 'ftc_node_destroy' follows non-static declaration /Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/include/freetype/cache/ftccache.h:89: error: previous declaration of 'ftc_node_destroy' was here make: *** [/Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/objs/ftcache.lo] Error 1 mps-iBook:~/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2 mps$ gcc --version powerpc-apple-darwin8-gcc-4.0.1 (GCC) 4.0.1 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 5247) Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. I received same error on GNU/Linux with gcc-4.0, although no error in building by gcc-2.95.3 and gcc-3.3.x. Am I testing wrong branch? Regards, mpsuzuki ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] last fixes for forthcoming release
Hi I found following tasks I have to finish before freetype-2.2. 1. Makefile in ft2demos should refer freetype2/modules.cfg, but does not at present. Therefore, libfreetype.la is built without gxvalid/otlavid module by default, but make -C ft2demos tries to build ftvalid and failed. 2. Makefiles for MPW should be updated. I've not updated MPW header files for the modification for internal headers. Regards, mpsuzuki On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:39:37 +0900 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:23:36 +0900 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In file included from /Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/src/cache/ftcache.c:24: /Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/src/cache/ftccache.c:262: error: static declaration of 'ftc_node_destroy' follows non-static declaration /Users/mps/redhat/BUILD/ft22test/freetype2/include/freetype/cache/ftccache.h:89: error: previous declaration of 'ftc_node_destroy' was here The error caused by following conflict: ftccache.h declares, around line #89 FT_BASE( void ) ftc_node_destroy( ... ) ftccache.c declares, around line #262 FT_LOCAL_DEF( void ) ftc_node_destroy( ... ) Which type is correct? Regards, mpsuzuki ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
[ft-devel] last fixes for forthcoming release
Folks, I've just updated the docs/release file -- please check it whether I've missed something. Additionally, I ask to control the CHANGES file too to synchronize it with the ChangeLog entries (this is especially something for Chia-Yi :-). Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
