I debated the idea, though I wasn't sure if this is a bug for them or RedHat directly.
Also, the only way I determined this was by looking at the patch file, and the line numbers, and looking at the relevant file being patched, and noticing the problem. I didn't try to apply the patch itself, or fix it. I don't want to mess with an OS provided package, so I just switched to a custom built source for now, making sure I edit the #define :) I've got my setup working, which was priority number one. I did the investigating, so Lowell, if you feel like it go ahead and validate my findings and submit the bug if you like :) I've already spent too much time on this and need to move on! (Porbably good someone double check my findings before filing a bug anyways) Thanks, J.F. -----Original Message----- From: Lowell.Filak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 6, 2006 1:04 PM To: Doyon, Jean-Francois Cc: 'Steven Bowden'; [email protected] Subject: Re: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] MapServer incompatibility with RHEL4/CE NTOS4.2 Doyon, Jean-Francois writes: > Alright, I have now officially tracked down the source of the problem. > > The FreeType 2.1.9-1 source package that comes with CentOS 4.2 is not > built properly, or at least packaged properly. > > It includes a patch called "freetype-2.1.3-enable-ft2-bci.patch" that > is supposed to turn on the ByteCode Interpreter within FreeType. > > This patch as you see dates back to version 2.1.3 ... And when applied > to the 2.1.9 source code, it doesn't work (the line numbers don't > match?), which means that the 2.1.9 binary package does NOT have the > Bytecode Interpreter enabled, as other releases always did. > > In my case at least, this causes the rendering problems I've been > experiencing. Also because I wasn't aware of this option, any package > I compiled manually would suffer from the problem as well. > > If I recompile the 2.1.9 source and manually edit the #define for BCI, > then everything is back to normal! > > Bloody hell. > > I suppose not all font files get affected the same way by this, so not > every one might notice a difference? J.F., Good work! Do you plan to submit something to the CentOS bug tracker? If it would help any I could install the srpm for RHEL 4 and submit a bug to RH directly after verifying the bad patch exists. Lowell
