|
From: | Urs Liska |
Subject: | Re: Format of -dshow-available-fonts output |
Date: | Tue, 24 Jul 2018 21:37:34 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 |
Am 24.07.2018 um 20:48 schrieb David Wright:
On Tue 24 Jul 2018 at 18:50:27 (+0200), Urs Liska wrote:Is it possible that the problem is due to an old fontconfig version used by LilyPond? my Debian package is 2.13.0, the LilyPond directory suggests a version 1.9.2 (is that possible?).Can you be a bit more specific about what versioning you mean. Here (Debian stretch): david 270584 Jun 24 07:12 /home/david/lilypond-2.19.82-1/lilypond/usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1.9.2 root 252968 Aug 24 2016 /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfontconfig.so.1.8.0 ii fontconfig 2.11.0-6.7+b1 amd64 generic font configuration library - support binaries ii libfontconfig1:amd64 2.11.0-6.7+b1 amd64 generic font configuration library - runtime It seems as if you're comparing package versions with library versions.
Indeed, I don't really know what I'm talking about. On my system I have installed $ apt show fontconfig Package: fontconfig Version: 2.13.0-5 which includes a libfontconfig1 package of that same version. In my system directories I have: $ ls -l /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ | grep fontconfig -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 492422 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.a lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so -> libfontconfig.so.1.11.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so.1 -> libfontconfig.so.1.11.1 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 273368 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so.1.11.1 and within the LilyPond installation (like you) $ ls -l ~/software/lilypond/releases/2.19.82/usr/lib/ | grep fontconfig -rwxr-xr-x 1 uliska uliska 1086 Jun 24 14:10 libfontconfig.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 uliska uliska 22 Mai 20 2017 libfontconfig.so -> libfontconfig.so.1.9.2 lrwxrwxrwx 1 uliska uliska 22 Mai 20 2017 libfontconfig.so.1 -> libfontconfig.so.1.9.2 -rwxr-xr-x 1 uliska uliska 270584 Jun 24 14:12 libfontconfig.so.1.9.2Am I right to think that LilyPond uses the bundled library (1.9.2?) while fc-list uses 1.11.1? If so, would that be an explanation for the differences in the reported font names? Or could it be related to some code in LilyPond, how that *uses* fontconfig?
Urs
Cheers, David.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |