Re: [Freetype] Re: [Fonts]FreeType 2 backend for XFree86

2002-04-04 Thread Juliusz Chroboczek
KP I believe freetype should be treated as a system library, much as KP libc is today. This could include building a thunk layer like the KP current xf86_ansic.h to ensure portability. You're absolutely right, as usual. Juliusz

Re: [Fonts]Re: [Freetype] FreeType 2 changes required for XFree86

2002-04-04 Thread Juliusz Chroboczek
BS Defining common names like ''read'' always leads to problems BS when using multiple packages. BS Why doesn't XFree86 follow common C protocol and use uppercase? BS Better yet, why not use a name like XF86_READ to avoid conflicts BS on such common names? The goal being to use common

[Fonts]Re: [Freetype] FreeType 2 changes required for XFree86

2002-04-04 Thread Juliusz Chroboczek
My wrong. Sorry for that. WL is in the middle of the ftsystem.c instead of the beginning. For some reason, I was convinced that malloc needs to be defined (by the #include), then undefined, then defined again. I'm glad it's not needed. Juliusz