SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
# This breaks far too many things. Freetype2 developers will have to get their
# punishment on someone else's distribution.
zcat $CWD/freetype.illadvisederror.diff.gz | patch -p1 --verbose || exit 1
You want to know if that patch should be left out, yet you don't want to look into the why?
In that case why don't you just trust the judgement of Patrick Volkerding? Leave that package alone.
Eric
Edit: or better - kill the patch, rebuild the package, and then rebuild one or more of the packages that link against freetype2 (there are many in Slackware, and more at http://SlackBuilds.org). This would be more instructive than my (somewhat) harsh original comment...
What I am trying to find out is what Pat's judgment is on this. As you know there are a couple of other lines in the slackbuild that can be commented out.
I just found lines
# This breaks far too many things. Freetype2 developers will have to get their
# punishment on someone else's distribution.
ambiguous
What is it with you guys? You are usually so helpful.
I don't like to point out the obvious nor to spend time on something useless.
It means what it says: the default freetype build will break many other pieces of software that link against freetype.. i.e. they will fail at the configure step.
Pat includes this literal text which I can not improve on:
Quote:
If you think breaking almost 100% of all source that links with freetype (anything using a configure file for sure) is a good idea, then feel free to uncomment this block.
It just dawned on me what your problem may be with that comment in the SlackBuild... you thought that leaving the line in would break things?
In that case, we had a dysfunctional conversation here... the patch fixes the breakage.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.