Fine... I can live with that. -Joseph
======================================================================= On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 13:04 -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 12:07 -0400, Joseph E. Sacco, Ph.D. wrote: > > FreeType-2.1.x contains libttf.so as well as libfreetype.so. See Fedora > > 4 & 5. > > > > > > In version 2.2.x, the true type font stuff has been incorporated into > > libfreetype and libttf.so has been eliminated. > > No, you are wrong. The FreeType *Fedora package* was shipping both > FreeType 1 and FreeType 2, so it included libttf.so. When updating it > to FreeType 2.2.1, I removed the FreeType 1 stuff. That hit Rawhide > this weekend. I'm going to package freetype1 for extras. > > To summarize, this has nothing to do with FreeType proper, or GNOME. > Just a Fedora packaging issue. > > behdad > > > -Joseph > > > > =========================================================================== > > > > On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 23:35 +0800, James Henstridge wrote: > > > On 10/07/06, Joseph E. Sacco, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > FreeType has been upgraded from 2.1.x => 2.2.x. Freetype-2.2.x does > > > > *not* contain libttf.so. Applications that were linked against > > > > libttf.so need to be rebuilt. > > > > > > Unless I'm mistaken, isn't libttf.so the Freetype 1.x library? It > > > hasn't been present in any freetype-2.x release and is not compatible > > > with the freetype-2.x series anyway (so it isn't just a case of > > > needing to rebuild applications). > > > > > > James. -- joseph_sacco [at] comcast [dot] net _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
