RE: [ft-devel] BDF and FT_Set_Pixel_Sizes

2005-12-06 Thread Turner, David 
Hello,


  I also have a (maybe stupid) question.  Why don't we simply have
 
  FT_Set_Pixel_Sizes( face, w, h )
  {
  FT_Set_Char_Size( face, w, h, 72, 72 ):
  }
 
  ?
 (More looking forward to comments on this question actually)


The question isn't stupid at all. The difference comes from the TrueType
bytecode specification, which makes a specific distinction between these
two scaling modes.

I can't remember the details though...


Also, it should be FT_Set_Char_Size( face, w*64, h*64, 72, 72 ) :-)

- David Turner
- The FreeType Project  (www.freetype.org)

PS: By the way, thanks a *lot* for your optimizations and bug fix
on the cmap processing code. Great work !

 --
 Regards,
 olv


 ___
 Freetype-devel mailing list
 Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
 http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel

***
Information contained in this email message is confidential and may be 
privileged, and is intended only for use of the individual or entity named 
above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the 
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are 
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please immediately notify the [EMAIL PROTECTED] and destroy the 
original message.
***



___
Freetype-devel mailing list
Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel

Re: [ft-devel] BDF and FT_Set_Pixel_Sizes

2005-12-06 Thread Chia-I Wu 
Hi,

 The question isn't stupid at all. The difference comes from the TrueType
 bytecode specification, which makes a specific distinction between these
 two scaling modes.
 I can't remember the details though...
Hmm... the truetype driver doesn't seem to distinguish them.  Is it
unimplemented or something?

-- 
Regards,
olv


___
Freetype-devel mailing list
Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel

[ft-devel] No support for side-by-side installation of x86-64 and i386

2005-12-06 Thread Ilya Konstantinov 
Hi,

Currently, freetype i386 and x86-64 collide in the following files:
/usr/bin/freetype-config
/usr/include/freetype2/freetype/config/ftconfig.h

This makes installation of two freetype development kits impossible.
Installing two development kits is desirable when the developer does
plenty of cross-compiling to x86-64/i386, which is often the case on
x86-64 machines.

It would be very much desired that:
1. freetype-config would be recoded to detect its environment and return
the appropriate directories, thus creating a single copy of
freetype-config on equal-prefix builds *or* freetype moved to pkgconfig
(freetype-config may remain a frontend)
2. ftconfig.h would be moved to the lib(64)/config directory, just as it
is for glib2 etc.

How do you guys feel about it?
(Please CC me, as I'm not subscribed to the mailing list.)



___
Freetype-devel mailing list
Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel