[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Announcing FreeType 2.10.3
From: |
Chris Liddell |
Subject: |
Re: Announcing FreeType 2.10.3 |
Date: |
Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:00:33 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 |
On 12/10/2020 17:47, Alexei Podtelezhnikov wrote:
>
> > So, we've had a report that building Ghostscript against Freetype
> > 2.10.3 fails because FT_CALLBACK_DEF() has been moved to internal
> > use only.
> >
> > Ghostcript supplies callbacks for memory management
> > (i.e. FT_MemoryRec) and we used FT_CALLBACK_DEF() for those, which
> > seemed logical when defining callbacks!
>
> Looks like an oversight to make it internal. Fact is that this macro
> is not publicly documented...
>
>
> The internal description suggests that this is a placeholder for
> __attribute__((fastcall)) and __atribute__((cdecl)), which we do not use
> ourselves.
>
> > Is there now an alternative way to do that? Or should we just
> > switch to explicitly declaring them static?
>
>
> Would ghostscript like to use those attributes?
I don't see any compelling reason for us to do so.
As I said, I'm quite happy just changing our callbacks to be directly
declared static functions. I just want to check that's what's intended,
and that there isn't a replacement for/alternative to FT_CALLBACK_DEF()
that we should be using.