XFree and freetype2

Mark Hymers markh at linuxfromscratch.org
Thu Sep 12 15:07:25 PDT 2002


On Fri, 06, Sep, 2002 at 08:44:06PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs spoke thus..
>   I don't see any advantage in installing a separate version of 
> freetype2.  In my mind, XFree86 is the first package someone will 
> install if they are going to install any GUI.  XFree86 includes 
> freetype2 so I don't see the need for a separate package.
> 
>   When we create host.def, it is merely a suggestion.  XFree86 will 
> compile just fine without any host.def.  There are also a lot of 
> definitions that could be discussed.  In one short chapter about the 
> installation, I don't believe we con or should address every possible 
> item that may be of interest.  We just present one combination that 
> works.  This combination also implicitly suggests other ways of doing 
> things. This follows the spirit of LFS: you can have it your way.  
> 
>   In light of the above, I do not see a compelling reason to chnage BLFS 
> to address this issue.

I have to disagree slightly on this one.  I think that we'd be better
off providing for the newest freetype-2 version.  Is it very difficult
to do?

If there's nothing beyond adding an extra #define to site.def and a
dependency for xfree86 on freetype-2, then I'd say go with it.

Mark

-- 
Mark Hymers <markh at linuxfromscratch dot org>

"I never make predictions.  I never have and I never will."
     Tony Blair
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list