fontforge - port installation

[ugajin at talktalk.net]

 Much appreciated and interesting.
Files were installed into /usr/local
Deleting them was very satisfying.
Thanks.
-A

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org>
To: ugajin at talktalk.net
CC: MacPorts Users <macports-users at lists.macosforge.org>
Sent: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 19:40
Subject: Re: fontforge - port installation



On Nov 5, 2013, at 06:03, ugajin at talktalk.net wrote:

> It is unclear where to get more detailed and specific info for the variants, 
so I guess I will go with the default.


> fontforge has the variants:
>    freetype_bytecode: Enable support for bytecode interpreter

fontforge uses the freetype library. The freetype library has a feature called 
the bytecode interpreter which lets it display glyphs more accurately, but the 
method it uses to do so was covered by an Apple Inc patent, so the freetype 
project was not legally allowed to use that method. The freetype port had 
variant allowing users (in regions of the world not covered by that patent) to 
use the feature anyway. The patent expired in 2010 so everybody may now legally 
use it. The freetype port now always uses the bytecode interpreter; the variant 
has been deleted.

The fontforge port has not had a maintainer since 2006 (r18094) so I guess 
nobody has noticed that fontforge still has this variant. Perhaps we should 
remove the variant from fontforge and always enable the feature there too. It’s 
also possible that the changes in freetype to always enable this feature will 
make fontforge unable to use this feature. The developers of fontforge appear 
not to have noticed the expiration of this patent either, since the latest code 
in their repository still refers users to Apple to get a license for the expired 
patent. I will attempt to report that problem to the developers of fontforge.

If you’re interested, this page shows the difference using the bytecode 
interpreter makes:

http://www.ludd.luth.se/~staham/linux/bci.shtml


>    python26: Enable Python support (Python 2.6)
>      * conflicts with python27
>    python27: Enable Python support (Python 2.7)
>      * conflicts with python26

Select one of these variants if you want python support in fontforge. I don’t 
know what that entails. In fact the port seems to be somewhat confused: it looks 
like the port actually includes python27 support, even if you don’t select 
either of these variants. This is a bug in the port that should be fixed.


>    universal: Build for multiple architectures

Instead of building for only your machine’s normal architecture, the universal 
variant builds a port for multiple architectures. Most ports have universal 
variants, but most users don’t usually need it.

It’s needed if you want to build a port on one computer and then run it on a 
second computer that has a different processor. Perhaps you want to build a 
standalone installer package for this port that you can distribute to other 
users.

MacPorts will automatically select the universal variant if it’s needed. For 
example, if you are using a 64-bit Mac, and the port you’re trying to install is 
only available 32-bit, but has dependencies on other ports that can be built 
64-bit, then MacPorts will install those dependencies with the universal variant 
in order to build them for both 32-bit and 64-bit.


>    with_freetype_bytecode: Legacy compatibility variant
>      * requires freetype_bytecode

Legacy compatibility variants are not of interest to new users. We keep these 
around for a year or so to help users who already installed a previous version 
of the port upgrade to a new version. Since this variant had already been around 
for 2 years, I have now deleted it.


> Will it matter if I fail to uninstall any of the dependencies for the the 
current (non-working) pkg version of fontforge?

I don’t know where your previous non-MacPorts fontforge installed its files. If, 
for example, it installed files, especially libraries, into /usr/local, then 
yes, that could be a problem. You should uninstall it, but most Mac software 
packages do not come with an uninstallation program, so you’ll have to check the 
web site where you got that installer package to see if they have any 
uninstallation instructions. Or you can re-download their installer, open it, 
don’t install it, but instead use the Show Files command in the Installer's File 
menu to see what it would install, then manually find those files on your drive 
and delete them.

Ease of uninstallation is one of the reasons why installing software with 
MacPorts is so much more convenient…


 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-users/attachments/20131106/f75ef045/attachment.html>