Re: XFree 4.2.1 + fontconfig-2

[Nicholas Wourms <nwourms at yahoo dot com>]

Hi Alan,

--- Alan Hourihane <alanh@fairlite.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 11:25:11 -0400, Harold Hunt wrote:
> > Nicholas,
> > 
> > I wasn't even aware of XFree86 4.2.1 until you mentioned it.
> > 
> > I am not sure if I will build a release of it or not... seems
> like a lot of
> > trouble for just a few fixes, with non of them Cygwin-specific.
>  
> 4.2.1 has an important security fix - arguably whether it matters
> for cygwin based installations though.

Yeah, you're probably right.  Still I haven't checked but I thought
it contained [operational] bug fixes as well?

> > As for building versioned DLLs --- I have no idea.  I am not
> knowledgeable
> > enough about that topic to be able to give you an answer, or even
> to be able
> > to discuss it.
> > 
> > In regards to Xft1 and XFt2, Alan Hourihane and I noticed a
> problem with
> > both of them being built and one DLL (version 1) wiping out the
> other DLL
> > (version 2), so we said to hell with it and stopped building Xft1
> and went
> > full-on with Xft2.  As to whether or not that was a good
> decision, I can
> > only say that Alan thought it was okay, so it is okay with me :)
> 
> For this issue, I would revisit it, if someone claimed that there
> are applications for Cygwin/XFree86 that relied on Xft1. I suspect
> for the number of applications that will become available for
> Cygwin/XFree86 they'll now be using Xft2 anyway. But please speakup
> if this is a problem, I will take another look at fixing it.

Well this isn't a problem for me.  Since you probably have a close
working relationship with Keith, I assume you are more clued-in than
me.  I made a hasty assumption and my thinking Xft2 was not source
compatible with Xft1 apps, so it may not be true.  Can you confirm
this?  I should be releasing QT2 shortly, which uses Xft, but I
haven't investigated if it compiles against Xft2 headers/libraries. 
I think some of the gtk-1 stuff uses Xft1, and someone is working on
this.  Just to be safe, I'm CC:'ing Steve O. who is working on the
Gnome port.

I still think, though, that it would be worth the effort to bring
Xfree's runtime libraries into sync with the "generally accepted"
Cygwin standard:

"cyg" + <library name - "lib"> + "ABI Revision" + ".dll" (i.e.
cygpopt0.dll)

I'm sure this would not only fix the issues now, but might prevent
further headaches in the future.  However, I know the hell that is
Imake, so I'm not going to make a big fuss over this now.  Perhaps a
suggestion for Cygwin/XFree-4.3.0?

> > So, in summary, there is not likely to be a release effort
> applied to
> > getting 4.2.1 out the door... unless I suddenly come up on a
> great amount of
> > time.  Also, Alan shipped me the standard X packages last time,
> which I fed
> > through the Cygwin packaging script, so if he does that this time
> I'll
> > likely make a 4.2.1 release.
> 
> There's no bandwidth from me at the moment to cover this, I'm
> swamped
> underneath lots and lots of work.

Hmm...  I guess it wouldn't make too much sense at the moment.  Just
if Harold was going to release a new test version, that's all.

While I have you here, I have a question which Harold said he didn't
know.  Why was libXaw built as a static library [it's usually shared
on linux]?  I'm running into some runtime issues with my libXaw3d
package [I built it as dll] and I suspect the answer lies in the
reasoning behind that question.  I was also wondering how you
generated the foo-def.cpp?  Is there a script that does this or do
you just have to go through the entire source?  Maybe I'm missing
something because I've been spoiled by libtool/ld autogenerating the
exports...

Cheers,
Nicholas

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com