MapServer incompatibility with RHEL4/CE NTOS4.2

[Doyon, Jean-Francois]

I debated the idea, though I wasn't sure if this is a bug for them or RedHat
directly.

Also, the only way I determined this was by looking at the patch file, and
the line numbers, and looking at the relevant file being patched, and
noticing the problem.

I didn't try to apply the patch itself, or fix it.  I don't want to mess
with an OS provided package, so I just switched to a custom built source for
now, making sure I edit the #define :)

I've got my setup working, which was priority number one.

I did the investigating, so Lowell, if you feel like it go ahead and
validate my findings and submit the bug if you like :) I've already spent
too much time on this and need to move on! (Porbably good someone double
check my findings before filing a bug anyways)

Thanks,
J.F.

-----Original Message-----
From: Lowell.Filak [mailto:lfilak at medinaco.org] 
Sent: March 6, 2006 1:04 PM
To: Doyon, Jean-Francois
Cc: 'Steven Bowden'; MAPSERVER-USERS at lists.umn.edu
Subject: Re: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] MapServer incompatibility with RHEL4/CE
NTOS4.2

Doyon, Jean-Francois writes: 

> Alright, I have now officially tracked down the source of the problem. 
> 
> The FreeType 2.1.9-1 source package that comes with CentOS 4.2 is not 
> built properly, or at least packaged properly.
> 
> It includes a patch called "freetype-2.1.3-enable-ft2-bci.patch" that 
> is supposed to turn on the ByteCode Interpreter within FreeType.
> 
> This patch as you see dates back to version 2.1.3 ... And when applied 
> to the 2.1.9 source code, it doesn't work (the line numbers don't 
> match?), which means that the 2.1.9 binary package does NOT have the 
> Bytecode Interpreter enabled, as other releases always did.
> 
> In my case at least, this causes the rendering problems I've been 
> experiencing.  Also because I wasn't aware of this option, any package 
> I compiled manually would suffer from the problem as well.
> 
> If I recompile the 2.1.9 source and manually edit the #define for BCI, 
> then everything is back to normal!
> 
> Bloody hell. 
> 
> I suppose not all font files get affected the same way by this, so not 
> every one might notice a difference?

J.F., 

Good work!
Do you plan to submit something to the CentOS bug tracker? If it would help
any I could install the srpm for RHEL 4 and submit a bug to RH directly
after verifying the bad patch exists. 

Lowell