Hi,
On: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 19:16:13 -0400,
David Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:26:27PM +0200, Rene Rebe wrote:
>
> >as mentioned weeks ago, current XFree CVS does not install a
> >fontconfig.pc anymore (it did up to 4.3.99.6 or so when the fontconfig
> >merge happend).
> >
> >This time a patch is attached (hereby relicensed to BSD, X11 whatever
> >you like - as usual).
> >
> >In my personal project I would do it cleaner - but it is in the
> >XFree86-way like implemented in Xcursor and Xft.
>
> Well, not quite -- there's no reason to duplicate files already in the
> source tree as your patch does, or to hardcode values that are defined
> elsewhere. That's not usually the XFree86 way.
Ah yes those do not have an seperate .pc - but still:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/xc/lib$ find -name config-subst
./Xft/config/config-subst
./fontconfig/config/config-subst
./Xcursor/config-subst
and the difinitions what to SUBST in the Imakefile.
> Anyway, I've committed a fix for this problem, based on what was in
> XFree86 4.3 (rather than relicensing the GPL'd version you sent :-).
>
> Just a suggestion regarding licensing of patches: The best way to avoid
> all possible confusion is to make the licensing unambiguous. I often
> go straight to the patch attachments, and that only has a GPL on it.
Ok - the next time I rip it off before ...
I there a better way to send patches? [EMAIL PROTECTED] seems to be a
/dev/null target (mostly get lost) - and on this list I normally also
do not get responses ...
> Thanks for your report.
Thanks for fixing it.
> David
Sincerely yours,
René Rebe
- ROCK Linux stable release maintainer
--
René Rebe - Europe/Germany/Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rocklinux.org http://www.rocklinux.net/people/rene
http://gsmp.tfh-berlin.de/gsmp http://gsmp.tfh-berlin.de/rene
_______________________________________________
XFree86 mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xfree86
