Re: [Freetype]2.0 release install problems on Unix systems

[Stefan Seefeld]

David Turner wrote:

> The header files didn't change because the "fix" was to install the
> header files as follows:
> 
>    $(prefix)/include/freetype2/
>                        freetype/
>                           config/
>                           cache/
>                           internals/
>                           freetype.h
>                           ....
> 
> The only "down-side" is that applications need to be compiled with
> a specific include path, like -I/usr/local/include/freetype2.
> (non-Unix platforms already require this)
> 
> Note that "make install" now installs a script named "freetype-config" that
> can be used by other configure scripts to detect where FreeType 2 is installed
> and what compiler or linker flags to use when an application uses the
> library.. with commands like:
> 
>   "freetype-config --cflags"  => returns C flags to use, e.g.  
> "-I$(prefix)/freetype2"
>   "freetype-config --libs"    => returns linker flags, e.g.    
> "-L$(prefix)/lib -lfreetype"
> 
> Note that I didn't write an ACLOCAL macro though, but I hope some Autoconf
> expert out there will be able to do that soon.. Except than that, I believe
> we're now pretty Unix-compliant !
> 
> Any comments ??

I understand the problem of conflicting headers. And I think a perfect solution 
is to
let the user decide where to install freetype(2). That should of course be 
reflected
by freetype-config.
That being said, I don't see a need for the subdirectory 'freetype2'. Either, 
the user
already uses an older freetype version, at which point he could just install 
freetype2
elsewhere, or he does not, than it doesn't matter anyway. May be the Makefile 
could check
for an existing freetype installation and warn about it. I'd guess that not 
many people
will use both versions anyway...
Of course, there is still a theoretical problem, which appears if you'd need to 
work with
both versions in the same project, i.e. you'd need be sure that the 
preprocessor chooses
the right '-I' statement for the right file. But that seems purely academical, 
as no-one will
ever use freetype 1 and freetype 2 in the same project.

Regards,        Stefan

PS: for binary packages, I'd suggest to pay attention that they are relocatable 
(rpm, deb),
    to avoid aforementioned conflict.

_______________________________________________________              
              
Stefan Seefeld
Departement de Physique
Universite de Montreal
email: address@hidden

_______________________________________________________

      ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...