Humm... as much as building a freetype application tells us that the
libraries work, I'm wondering if we could just do something like this
in the makefile sanity check:
ifdef OPENJDK
FREETYPE_VERSION_H=$(FREETYPE_HEADERS_PATH)/freetype/freetype.h
_FREETYPE_VER := \
if [ -f "${FREETYPE_VERSION_H}" ] ; then \
_major="`${GREP} 'define FREETYPE_MAJOR' | ${CUT} -d' ' -f3`" ; \
_minor="`${GREP} 'define FREETYPE_MINOR' | ${CUT} -d' ' -f3`" ; \
_micro="`${GREP} 'define FREETYPE_PATCH' | ${CUT} -d' ' -f3`" ; \
$(ECHO) "${_major}.${_minor}.${_micro}"; \
else \
$(ECHO) "0.0.0"; \
fi
FREETYPE_VER :=$(call GetVersion,"$(_FREETYPE_VER)")
FREETYPE_CHECK :=$(call
CheckVersions,$(FREETYPE_VER),$(REQUIRED_FREETYPE_VERSION))
sane-freetype:
@if [ "$(FREETYPE_CHECK)" != "same" -a "$(FREETYPE_CHECK)" != "newer"
]; then \
$(ECHO) "ERROR: The version of freetype being used is older than \n" \
" the required version of '$(REQUIRED_FREETYPE_VERSION)'. \n" \
" The version of freetype found was '$(FREETYPE_VER)'. \n" \
"" >> $(ERROR_FILE) ; \
fi
else
#do nothing (not OpenJDK)
sane-freetype:
endif
---
Just a thought.... Then that whole freetype check program can go away,
but if the libraries are wrong, we won't find out at sanity check time.
(I have not tested the above logic)
-kto
Tim Bell wrote:
Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Looks good Tim.
Thanks, Kelly. I plan to push this fix to the build forest later today.
I wish that freetype just had a simple version.h file we could check. :^(
I checked the freetype 2.3.5 include files... we could use this from
include/freetype/freetype.h:
/*************************************************************************
*
* @enum:
* FREETYPE_XXX
*
* @description:
* These three macros identify the FreeType source code version.
* Use @FT_Library_Version to access them at runtime.
*
* @values:
* FREETYPE_MAJOR :: The major version number.
* FREETYPE_MINOR :: The minor version number.
* FREETYPE_PATCH :: The patch level.
*
* @note:
* The version number of FreeType if built as a dynamic link library
* with the `libtool' package is _not_ controlled by these three
* macros.
*/
#define FREETYPE_MAJOR 2
#define FREETYPE_MINOR 3
#define FREETYPE_PATCH 5
Tim
-kto
Tim Bell wrote:
Hi Folks
When building OpenJDK, the freetype sanity check compiles a
little program to test that the freetype include files and
libraries are available, and also that the version number is
acceptable.
If building on Windows and using a Visual Studio compiler
newer than 2003, this program will fail due to the new
rules for accessing MSVCR??.dll. [1]
I didn't make the up the rules, in fact I am extremely
puzzled that Microsoft is forcing ALL external developers
and ISVs to solve this problem. I am trying to get the
OpenJDK build to deal with them or at least tolerate
them for those people out there who build OpenJDK on
Windows.
The bugzilla report:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100101
The code review:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tbell/6705913/webrev.00/
These changes build OK on all JPRT systems:
linux_i586_2.6
linux_x64_2.6
solaris_i586_5.10
solaris_sparc_5.10
solaris_sparcv9_5.10
solaris_x64_5.10-
windows_i586_5.0
windows_x64_5.2
They also work on my Windows XP SP2 / Visual Studio 2008
build machine.
Thanks in advance-
Tim
[1] How to redistribute the Visual C++ Libraries with your application (Ben
Anderson)
http://blogs.msdn.com/vcblog/archive/2007/10/12/how-to-redistribute-the-visual-c-libraries-with-your-application.aspx
