linux vs freebsd fc-cache binaries

Joe Marcus Clarke marcus at FreeBSD.org
Fri Dec 31 11:52:38 PST 2004


On Fri, 2004-12-31 at 14:05 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:59:52 -0500
> Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2004-12-31 at 00:40 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> > > On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:01:17 -0500
> > > Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 2.1.9 would work, but we have not updated due to the API changes.
> > > > Therefore, I haven't tested 2.1.9 to know if its rendering style will be
> > > > uglier than 2.1.7.  If someone can produce a 2.1.9 RPM, and it renders
> > > > decent fonts, then by all means, go for it.
> > > 
> > > Will the data produced by fc-cache be compatible? The linux bits will
> > > use the FreeBSD fonts, so any files generated in a place which FreeBSD
> > > sees too has to be compatible.
> > 
> > The data produced by the two should be compatible, but the versions of
> > fontconfig are so different, I can't say for sure.  The files, however,
> > are text, so you should be able to visually compare
> 
> Here's the difference between our fc-cache and the linux one. Our
> fc-cache produces some more hints, but I hope this doesn't confuse the
> linux bits. I intend to _not_ run the linux version of fc-cache and let
> the FreeBSD version handle the fonts.

The hinting shouldn't matter.  Freetype should just ignore what it
doesn't understand.

Joe

-- 
Joe Marcus Clarke
FreeBSD GNOME Team      ::      gnome at FreeBSD.org
FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-x11/attachments/20041231/6719e7a5/attachment.bin


More information about the freebsd-x11 mailing list