Dear Ryan, Sorry for your (and MacPorts project people's) inconvenience. I'm current maintainer of MacOS specific part of FreeType.
On Sat, 17 May 2008 05:03:33 -0500 Ryan Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The problem is that I cannot build a universal binary of freetype >(2.3.5) when running on a Mac OS X 10.4 PowerPC machine. I believe >this is because freetype is trying to link with /usr/lib/ >libSystem.B.dylib even when cross-compiling for Intel. This doesn't >work because on a Mac OS X 10.4 PowerPC machine, /usr/lib/ >libSystem.B.dylib only contains PowerPC code. I see. Mainly I use PowerBook G4 and I had experienced that. The installation of universal binary SDK for Mac OS X 10.4 does not integrate its content with the system libraries. >However freetype doesn't seem to be making use of the sysroot in this >case. Can you help me make freetype use the sysroot, or think of >another solution? Thanks. I will update configure script to support sysroot, but I want to ask 2 questions to automate it. Please give me your comment. 1. What is standard/popular method to specify the architechtures to be included in the binary? You mentioned the method "-isysroot xxx -arch xxx -arch yyy ..." is used in MacPorts, I have to update configure script to extract the list of architechture from CFLAG option. Is there any other popular method to be supported? 2. Carbon-dependent API should be consistent among the architechtures included in the universal binaries? libSystem.B.dylib of SDK 10.4u includes all 4 architectures ppc|ppc64|i386|x86_64, but CoreServices & ApplicationServices (frameworks required by QuickDraw/ATS-related functions in ftmac.c) includes only 2 architectures ppc|i386. If a consistency of APIs in universal binary is important, ftmac.c should be disabled on all architechtures, when the list of architechture includes ppc64 or x86_64. The features of universal binary is less than the prebuilt library libfreetype.6.3.dylib in SDK 10.4u (it includes only ppc & i386, no ppc64, no x86_64). I'm afraid such incompatibility makes people confused. However, I'm not sure if building 64bit binaries by SDK 10.4u is popular /or not. Regards, mpsuzuki _______________________________________________ Freetype mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype
