[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Xft and Freetype



On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 07:06:05PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> Hi all,
>    The broken shlibs in freetype is causing huge issues for testing right
> now because xft migrated in without the correct freetype. There are two
> options that I'm aware of: to have freetype migrate in or to upload the old
> version of xft with an epoch bump, let it migrate in to testing, and then
> upload the new version with a shlibs.local. I'd prefer the former option,
> but I'm also not willing to maintain freetype :-) I have an NMU prepared
> for freetype that bumps its shlibs and also fixes its build-dep on
> xlibs-dev. I'd be happy to upload this if the release team deems it the
> right move.

This really ought to have been dealt with by blocking xft in unstable until
freetype was sorted.  I'm not sure why there was no RC bug on xft about
this... too late now, though.

So the situation now is that upstream has decided to restore the libfreetype
ABI to compatibility with version 2.1.7, even though this means keeping
their internal functions exposed.  In theory this means there will not be an
ABI change for etch.  But upstream hasn't yet released this ABI-compatible
version, so it doesn't much help us at the moment.

In the meantime, I'm going ahead and pushing freetype 2.1.10 into testing.
The trade-off is that this will break the old version of gnustep, and the
new gnustep isn't ready to go in.  But it fixes all the other packages that
depend on libxft2 et al., so this is still the better option.  The gnustep
maintainers will just need to get their act together and finish their own
ABI transition.

Incidentally, the latest gnustep-back *still* uses internal interfaces from
freetype, so it's going to break again when freetype reinstates
compatibility with 2.1.7.  That's a gnustep-back bug; it needs to be fixed
to not use these internal interfaces, which will *not* be supported by
freetype upstream in the long term.

> I know no one wants to deal with freetype, but we should resolve this
> issue somehow...

Er, not at all; it's just not something that can be dealt with very easily
before upstream makes their move.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: