On 7/10/06, Joseph E. Sacco, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.
Thats entirely a fedora packaging
On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 12:48 -0400, Joseph E. Sacco, Ph.D. wrote:
OK... Which leads us back to my original comment that apps that are
linked against libttf.so need to be rebuilt.
Still no. Even rpms built using it don't need to be rebuilt, as rpms
depend on /usr/lib/libtts.so.*, not the
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
Which still points at Fedora. On other distros that don't do this, those
apps don't need to be rebuilt. On Debian, for example, libttf.so is in a
separate package anyway. Please take this to Fedora's bugzilla.
-- dobey
On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 12:48 -0400, Joseph E. Sacco, Ph.D. wrote:
OK...
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
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.
-Joseph
===
On Mon,
This is a bug in the Fedora packaging then. They've been packaging
freetype 1 2 in the same RPM since before Fedora. If they're not
doing so any more, they probably have good reason to, such as nothing
in the distro needs freetype 1 any longer, which seems likely. You
should file a bug in the
OK... Which leads us back to my original comment that apps that are
linked against libttf.so need to be rebuilt.
-Joseph
=
On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 12:34 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On 7/10/06, Joseph E. Sacco,
On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 12:48 -0400, Joseph E. Sacco, Ph.D. wrote:
OK... Which leads us back to my original comment that apps that are
linked against libttf.so need to be rebuilt.
What is this doing on desktop-devel-list?
Ross
--
Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL
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
d-d-l??? Oops... Sorry for the spew. This thread started out on /
was intended for a fedora development list. Looks like I need some time
away from the keyboard...
-Joseph
==
On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 19:59 +0100, Ross Burton
11 matches
Mail list logo
