Re: Bitstream Vera fonts rpm (fontconfig vers
- From: <Jim Gettys hp com>
- To: Nicolas Mailhot <Nicolas Mailhot laPoste net>
- Cc: Jim Gettys hp com, fonts gnome org, michael fedrowitz de, keithp keithp org
- Subject: Re: Bitstream Vera fonts rpm (fontconfig vers
- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:16:20 -0700 (PDT)
Aaaarg!
This seems pretty broken (or do you have an obsolte fontconfig installed
in /usr/local?). I get 2.1.94 when I as the version number from
either fc-list or fc-cache, that I installed earlier today from Keith's
latest tarball....
- Jim
> Sender: fonts-admin gnome org
> From: Nicolas Mailhot <Nicolas Mailhot laPoste net>
> Date: 17 Apr 2003 21:24:33 +0200
> To: Jim Gettys hp com
> Cc: fonts gnome org, michael fedrowitz de, keithp keithp org
> Subject: Re: Bitstream Vera fonts rpm
> -----
> Le jeu 17/04/2003 ? 20:06, Jim Gettys hp com a ?crit :
> > Here's the issue about running fc-cache...
> >
> > "fc-cache" by itself should have been sufficient to cause just the
> > affected cache files to get redone.
> >
> > But prior to fontconfig 2.2 (about to be released), on some systems
> > (including my laptop), there has been a bug such that the right cache
> > files don't get computed/written when they should. I believe Keith thinks
> > this bug has been fixed.
> >
> > The workaround prior to 2.2 is to execute a "fc-cache -f" to force
> > redoing *all* of the cache files. This can be time consuming on systems
> > with lots of fonts, but it at least works reliably, so that installed
> > fonts actually appear.
> >
> > "fc-cache -V" will tell you fontconfig's version number. Ideally (presuming
> > the bug is really dead), you'd check the version number, and only run
> > with the "-f" option if you see old versions of fontconfig.
>
> Well, this doesn't help a lot, current RedHat Raw Hide fontconfig
> package is at 2.1.9 but fc-cache -V gives 1.0.2.
> I guess they didn't see fit to patch -V like they did the rest of
> fontconfig. So fc-cache -V is not terribly useful on RH systems.
>
> I've never seen this bug on RH. However the fc-cache command is already
> in the spec file, if you think -f is worth it adding it is trivial. Do
> you want me to do it/send the resulting rpms somewhere ? Obviously I
> won't post them on a mailing list.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Nicolas Mailhot
>
> Enclosed file: signature.asc (<1 KBytes)
--
Jim Gettys
Cambridge Research Laboratory
HP Labs, Hewlett-Packard Company
Jim Gettys hp com
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]