Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-14 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Bruce Dubbs wrote: This may be an exception, Randy. X uses fontconfig whuch requires freetype. It's a bit harder to do cut and paste before X is built. Personally, I would rather use vi to edit the file than type in a really long sed that only applies to one file. :) I think I agree. If you

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-14 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Randy McMurchy wrote: > Unfortunately, for folks that may type the commands in, it is a > bit more tedious. But I seriously doubt many guys type in the > commands from the majority of the packages in the BLFS book, > unlike the LFS book. This may be an exception, Randy. X uses fontconfig whuch r

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-14 Thread Randy McMurchy
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 06/14/05 06:32 CST: > Remember this? > > " Not sure if it's better, but it's shorter: > > sed -i '[EMAIL PROTECTED]/\* \(.*BYTE.*\) \*/@\1@' \ > include/freetype/config/ftoption.h " Yes. I should have clarified myself more. We use a sed instead of a pat

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-14 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > Um, did you guys miss my post earlier in this thread that had a sed > option much like this one? No. We were just discussing options. > " Not sure if it's better, but it's shorter: > > sed -i '[EMAIL PROTECTED]/\* \(.*BYTE.*\) \*/@\1@' \ > include/freetype/config

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-14 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Bruce Dubbs wrote: Randy McMurchy wrote: Here's the simplest sed my feeble mind can come up with using the backreference method: sed -i \ "s:/\* \(#define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER\) \*/:\1:" \ include/freetype/config/ftoption.h or minimally: sed -i "s/.*\(#def.*ETER\).

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Randy McMurchy wrote: > Here's the simplest sed my feeble mind can come up with using the > backreference method: > > sed -i \ > "s:/\* \(#define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER\) \*/:\1:" \ > include/freetype/config/ftoption.h > How about: sed -i "s:/\* \(#define.*INTERPRETER\)

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Randy McMurchy
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 06/13/05 21:32 CST: > Checking BLFS, I see a few more, but none using the baskreference notation. Thanks for the agreement on the learning experience, Bruce. However, it makes for an ugly sed. I don't like the fact that we have to escape the * (asterisk) in the se

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Randy McMurchy wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 06/13/05 19:36 CST: > > >>I think we can do this one with a sed. > > > All of the provided suggestions are good. However, I vote we use > a sed with the backreference method. As best as I can think, there > is not one place in LFS or BLFS

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Randy McMurchy
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 06/13/05 19:36 CST: > I think we can do this one with a sed. All of the provided suggestions are good. However, I vote we use a sed with the backreference method. As best as I can think, there is not one place in LFS or BLFS where we use the \1 (backreference) met

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
David Jensen wrote: echo TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER >> \ include/freetype/config/ftoption.h oh, and btw, I'm sure you've noticed already, but in case you haven't, you forgot the #define :P -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscra

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread David Jensen
David Jensen wrote: echo TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER >> \ include/freetype/config/ftoption.h -- David Jensen oops forgot the #define echo "#define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER" >> \ include/freetype/config/ftoption.h -- David Jensen -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mail

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
David Jensen wrote: The order is not important. echo TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER >> \ include/freetype/config/ftoption.h Yes, I thought about that too, however, I figured we should be able to find a shorter command with a sed, and I believe I did. :) Of, course, which way the book

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread David Jensen
Bruce Dubbs wrote: Matthew Burgess wrote: -/* #define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER */ +#define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER I think we can do this one with a sed. The order is not important. echo TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER >> \ include/freetype/config/

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Greg Schafer wrote: sed -i.bak \ -e '/def.*BYTE/s,^/\* ,,' \ -e '/def.*BYTE/s, \*/$,,' \ include/freetype/config/ftoption.h Tho' there is probably a better way... Not sure if it's better, but it's shorter: sed -i '[EMAIL PROTECTED]/\* \(.*BYTE.*\) \*/@\1@' \ incl

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Greg Schafer
Randy McMurchy wrote: > What I meant to say was that it would be a *long* sed expression. > However, using /1 syntax we can probably keep it under 70 chars. Here's what I've been using: sed -i.bak \ -e '/def.*BYTE/s,^/\* ,,' \ -e '/def.*BYTE/s, \*/$,,' \ include/freetype/

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Randy McMurchy
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 06/13/05 19:44 CST: > [absolutely nothing due to accidentally hitting send] What I meant to say was that it would be a *long* sed expression. However, using /1 syntax we can probably keep it under 70 chars. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 200412

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Randy McMurchy
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 06/13/05 19:36 CST: > Matthew Burgess wrote: > >>Hi folks, >> >>Here's an updated patch, as the existing one doesn't apply to the latest >>upstream release. >> >>Regards, >> >>Matt. >> >> >> >>

Re: Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Matthew Burgess wrote: > Hi folks, > > Here's an updated patch, as the existing one doesn't apply to the latest > upstream release. > > Regards, > > Matt. > > > > > Submitted By: BLFS Book > Date: 2005-06-13 > Initial P

Freetype-2.1.10 bytecode interpreter patch

2005-06-13 Thread Matthew Burgess
Hi folks, Here's an updated patch, as the existing one doesn't apply to the latest upstream release. Regards, Matt. Submitted By: BLFS Book Date: 2005-06-13 Initial Package Version: 2.1.10 Origin: Freetype FAQ Description: Enables bytecode interpreter for TT driver. diff -Naur freetype-2.1.