Ian Pilcher ian.pilcher@home.com writes:
FT_SFNT_NAMES_H doesn't appear anywhere in the 2.0.1 headers. It appears to be impossible to be source code compatible between 2.0.1 and 2.0.2.
How about doing autoconf checks for all the possible header names variations, and including the ones we find? This would be a lot more robust than trying to find the header that defines the macros that define the headers that define what we need...
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
FT_SFNT_NAMES_H doesn't appear anywhere in the 2.0.1 headers. It appears to be impossible to be source code compatible between 2.0.1 and 2.0.2.
How about doing autoconf checks for all the possible header names variations, and including the ones we find? This would be a lot more robust than trying to find the header that defines the macros that define the headers that define what we need...
I *believe* that <freetype/freetype.h> should always include the header that defines the macros. If not, it's going to be a nightmare checking for 2.0.1, 2.0.2, 2.0.3, etc. -- let alone every intermediate snapshot that a rawhide/cooker distribution might use.
On 30 May 2001, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Ian Pilcher ian.pilcher@home.com writes:
FT_SFNT_NAMES_H doesn't appear anywhere in the 2.0.1 headers. It appears to be impossible to be source code compatible between 2.0.1 and 2.0.2.
How about doing autoconf checks for all the possible header names variations, and including the ones we find? This would be a lot more robust than trying to find the header that defines the macros that define the headers that define what we need...
The first step isn't a problem, freetype/freetype.h includes ft2build.h and hence ft2header.h, so including freetype.h and counting on macros to exist should work on all FT2 versions. Then, conditionally including stuff using the HAVE_FOO_H macros that autoconf would define wouldn't be much better than conditionally including stuff based on the FT_FOO_H macros.
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Ian Pilcher -
Ove Kaaven