Date: 04 Feb 2003 09:37:09 -0800 From: Eric Anholt <anholt@FreeBSD.org> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: Alan Eldridge <alane@freebsd.org>, cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/kdebase3 Makefile Message-ID: <1044380228.615.19.camel@leguin> In-Reply-To: <200302041219.24215.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> References: <200302031235.h13CZwGB073669@repoman.freebsd.org> <200302031408.14342.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <1044378636.615.10.camel@leguin> <200302041219.24215.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 09:19, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > On Tuesday 04 February 2003 12:10 pm, Eric Anholt wrote: > > = It would be best if QT could use Xft2, as that's the future. In stock > = XFree86 4.3, Xft1 programs compiled against it use the Xft2 library. > = The backwards compatibility is not perfect, so for now we will > = continue to have libXft2.so.2. In stock XF86, it's called libXft.so.2 > = and there's a binary-compatible Xft1 library at libXft.so.1 which > = nothing new ends up using. The current XFree86 4.3-pre ports I'm > = working on continue with the libXft2.so.2 system we've had. > > I'm sorry, could you elaborate on the advantage of libXft2.so.2 over the > libXft.so.2? I understand, that the older binaries need the libXft.so.1, > but why call the new version libXft2? This will force us to patch a > lot of things (starting with Qt)... If it is for compatibility with > something we already shipped, how about symlinking libXft2.so.x to > libXft.so.2? When keithp created Xft2, he moved much of Xft1's functionality into fontconfig. There are compatibility macros (See XftCompat.h from the Xft2 port) so some Xft1 programs will continue to work with Xft2. However, other things (pango for example) use more of the old Xft1 than the compatibility macros provide. To work around this, we have libXft.so.2 to renamed to libXft2.so.2 and its header from Xft.h to Xft2.h and continued installing the Xft1 Xft.h. Hopefully, with 4.3 coming up and Xft2 being installed by default for many users, people will get software updated to Xft2 or at least able to use the XFt1 compatibility and we can remove the renaming. > = Hopefully by the time 4.3 hits the tree we'll have the Xft1 programs > = with problems converted to Xft2 or fixed, so they can work without the > = renaming of libraries/includes that we currently do. > > = The Xft2 port will continue to exist. I think the more we keep these > = libraries split from being a monolithic build, the better. > > Agreed -- if it means, the XFree86-4-libraries (or -clients) will depend > on it -- like it does on freetype2 -- instead of building its own :-) The new XFree86-4-libraries has no dependencies on Xft, but XFree86-4-clients does. It continues to provide the old Xft1 binary compatibility library like stock XFree86 does but doesn't install Xft2. I question the usefulness of the Xft1 binary compat library, it might be something to remove completely. However, until we have the old Xft1 ports sufficiently fixed to work with Xft2, we can't go back to a stock naming of Xft parts, so it's moot. -- Eric Anholt eta@lclark.edu http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ anholt@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1044380228.615.19.camel>