Re: [ft-devel] couple of new issues with 2.5.1

[Hin-Tak Leung]

------------------------------
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 11:36 GMT Werner LEMBERG wrote:

>
>> - ftgrid in demos now fails to compile due to missing symbol when
>> freetype itself is built in release mode. It used to work in 2.5.0.
>
>Uh, oh, for me it compiles just fine, using gcc 4.7.2.  What commands
>did you try?  Which compiler version?  After unpacking the two
>archives I did
>
>  ln -s freetype-2.5.1 freetype2
>  cd freetype-2.5.1
>  make devel
>  make
>  cd ../ft2demos-2.5.1
>  make

I wrote 'release mode'. 'make devel' does debug mode? 

compiler is gcc 4.8.2. But the issue is about just plain 'make' with the 
library. 

>> - cross-compile with libpng enabled now fails about use of
>>   libpng-config.  The fedora cross-compile tool chain actually sets
>>   $LIBPNG_CONFIG which can do the right thing for generating
>>   $LIBPNG_CFLAGS and $LIBPNG_LDFLAGS on the fly.  [...]
>>
>> Can you consider improving/modifying on this ugly patch to allow
>> libpng-enabled cross-compile based on $LIBPNG_CONFIG being set?
>
>I'm not an expert in cross compiling, but relying on a
>distribution-specific environment variable like $LIBPNG_CONFIG is
>problematic.  Why not setting LIBPNG_CFLAGS and LIBPNG_LDFLAGS as
>advertised on the command line?
>
>  LIBPNG_CFLAGS=`$LIBPNG_CONFIG --cflags` \
>  LIBPNG_LDFLAGS=`$LIBPNG_CONFIG --ldflags` \
>  ./configure --host=... \
>              --build=...
>
>Behdad outlined a solution for pkg-config; see this thread:
>
>  http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/freetype-devel/2013-09/msg00005.html
>

It is about packaging and also automation... Fedora have a set of macros which 
expands configure and do the right thing... 

What it does isn't too different from what you currently do: you currently 
tests for LIBPNG_CFLAGS and LIBPNG_LDFLAGS. 
What I am asking for is to test also for LIBPNG_CONFIG,  and use it to generate 
the other two, before failing. 

The cross-compile framework also provides generic pkg-config based relocation 
too, which might be similar to what behdad suggests. 

I can look into how that does pkg-config and/or make the ugly patch less ugly, 
if you are open to a bit of extra code? 

(cross-compiling is never pretty so it is somewhat dependent to how much 
ugliness you can tolerate... I found what fedora provides enough for 
win32/win64 and mac x86/x64/ppc32 to feel comfortable making an effort staying)

regards, 
hin-tak