Re: [Freetype] FreeType 2.0 SNAFU

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Fri, 1 Dec 2000, Werner LEMBERG wrote:

> > > Well, yes, I agree.  I can do the appropriate changes -- to be 8+3
> > > compliant, I suggest `freetype.2' as the directory name (note the
> > > dot).  This makes FT2 a bit unique, but it works :-)
> > 
> > ah, now I remember. That is silly, are there still platforms which
> > need the 8+3 format ?
> 
> Yes. DOS.  You should discuss this issue with Eli Zaretskii :-)
> Nevertheless, David's changes will make my suggestions obsolete.

Cpp-calculated include paths are not considered portable across all
compilers.  This is even true for C++ compilers.

Take care with file extensions since Windows likes to associate
programs with extensions.  There is no telling what it does with
extensions on directory names.

> > Hmm, but that would mean that the freetype-conf script would need to
> > be modified at installation time, as it contains these paths...
> 
> It is already modified at configure time which also defines the
> installation locations.

It seems unfortunate to require the build environment to pass a -D
option to allow the headers to work.  Other package's headers "just
plain work".  Why can this not be true for FreeType as well?

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen