Re: [Freetype] FreeType 2.0 SNAFU

[David Turner]

Hi Werner,

Werner LEMBERG a écrit :
> 
> > what was the reason to put the headers into
> > /usr/local/include/freetype2/freetype and not simply
> > /usr/local/include/freetype2 ?
> 
> It was a last-minute fix from David before the 2.0 release.  It's
> quite unfortunate, I know, but using `/usr/local/include/freetype2'
> had caused changes in almost all FreeType source code files.
> 
It was a last minute fix, because for some reasons I have always
thought that there wasn't any conflict

BTW, I suppose that you meant that it *would* have caused changes
in almost all FreeType source code files :-)

Actually, I just commited significant changes to the content of
"include/freetype". Please have a look at <freetype/config/ftbuild.h>
and the way it is used in public header files, like:

  #ifndef    FT_BUILD_H
  #  define  FT_BUILD_H  <freetype/config/ftbuild.h>
  #endif
  #include   FT_BUILD_H
  #include   FT_TYPES_H
  #...etc..

The next step is moving the current content of <freetype/freetype.h> to
a new file, like <FT_ROOT/ftapi.h> and rewrite "freetype.h" file like:

  #ifndef __FREETYPE_H__
  #define __FREETYPE_H__

  #define  FT_ROOT     freetype2     // wathever installation path
  #define  FT_BUILD_H  <FT_ROOT/config/ftbuild.h>

  #include <FT_ROOT/ftapi.h>

  #endif __FREETYPE_H__


of course, we first need to modify the module's source files before doing
this, and we also need to advertise clearly that <freetype/....> is not
the favored public root anymore for client applications.. !!

  !!=> updating the documentation !!

> On Unix, the final location really doesn't matter IMHO due to the
> `freetype-config' script.  Since we don't have `install' targets for
> other platforms, David's quick solution doesn't really hurt.
>

Regards,

- David