apply issue fixes and apply pull requests

[mgood7123]

pulls applied:

#66 - CMake: Fix pkgconfig generation.
#65 - don't install a libtool file with static library
#60 - Install cmake files under lib
#59 - Apply the same settings used for Linux also to k*BSD and GNU Hurd
#56 - Windows static build: COMPILE_DEFINITIONS: GRAPHITE2_STATIC
#54 - Fix the static build on Darwin
#45 - Correct relative library path

pulls not applied:

#53 as is unclear what exactly should be done

issues fixed:

#68 - set_property could not find CACHE variable CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE
#61 - fix to build with Intel compiler

issues not fixed:

#55 as it is unclear if the suggested patch/fix is stable

[bgermann]

It would have been great if you had kept the authors' names in the commits but thanks anyway.

[mgood7123]

It would have been great if you had kept the authors' names in the commits but thanks anyway.

added :)

[lantw44]

It would be nice if you could include this change. FreeBSD uses amd64 instead of x86_64.

-    if (${CMAKE_SYSTEM_PROCESSOR} MATCHES "x86|i.86")
+    if (${CMAKE_SYSTEM_PROCESSOR} MATCHES "x86|i.86|amd64")

[a17r]

[non-graphite-dev] git messages should describe what they do, not what number of pull request or issue they incorporate. [/non-graphite-dev]

It would have been great if you had kept the authors' names in the commits but thanks anyway.

added :)

I don't see that? If you didn't use cherry-pick to get the pull request commits, you can re-establish original authorship with --amend --author="name <email>"

Why are you duplicating existing PRs anyway? Do they need changes? If so, which did you make?

[mgood7123]

[non-graphite-dev] git messages should describe what they do, not what number of pull request or issue they incorporate. [/non-graphite-dev]

It would have been great if you had kept the authors' names in the commits but thanks anyway.

added :)

I don't see that? If you didn't use cherry-pick to get the pull request commits, you can re-establish original authorship with --amend --author="name <email>"

Why are you duplicating existing PRs anyway? Do they need changes? If so, which did you make?

simply to merge all into a single PR :)

[mgood7123]

feel free to clone my repo and rewrite the history as you like, directly referencing the issues/pulls that the commit fixes is easier than trying to come up with an accurate description of what exactly has been changed

[a17r]

No. git log shall be meaningful locally without visiting github links. This is a terrible way to organise a repository.

[mgood7123]

No. git log shall be meaningful locally without visiting github links. This is a terrible way to organise a repository.

suggest some then :)

someone can probably come up with something that first under 50 chars for each commit :)

i dont have much time to rename the commits to be more meaningful

i can give you write access to my repo so you can rewrite the commit history to be more meaningful if you want

[mgood7123]

[non-graphite-dev] git messages should describe what they do, not what number of pull request or issue they incorporate. [/non-graphite-dev]

It would have been great if you had kept the authors' names in the commits but thanks anyway.

added :)

I don't see that? If you didn't use cherry-pick to get the pull request commits, you can re-establish original authorship with --amend --author="name <email>"

Why are you duplicating existing PRs anyway? Do they need changes? If so, which did you make?

also i think it is easier to just merge a PR that already has a ton of PR/issues merged/fixed in a single go rather than trying to merge and fix each one