hi, It's likely the different compilation options for freetype. Or even gentoo specific patches to freetype or sdl_ttf.
Otherwise it could be different bitdepth surfaces. eg, 24bit on one machine and 16bit on another. cheers, On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Charlie Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > *taps on the glass* Anybody out there? > > On 8/25/08, Charlie Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> So, anything else you want me to poke at, or is someone going to take >> a look? For that matter, have you guys been able to duplicate the >> problem? >> >> -FM >> >> On 8/23/08, Charlie Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> It was at 2.3.7. I downgraded it to 2.3.5 temporarily, and it shows >>> the same results as 2.3.7. >>> >>> -FM >>> >>> On 8/22/08, Lenard Lindstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> That's right for SDL_ttf. What freetype version does Gentoo have. Pygame >>>> 1.8 uses freetype-2.3.5 on Windows. >>>> >>>> Lenard >>>> >>>> >>>> Charlie Nolan wrote: >>>>> SDL_ttf is at 2.0.9 on Linux, and after digging a bit, the SDL_ttf.dll >>>>> that came with pygame shows version 2.0.9.0. Looks like a match to >>>>> me. >>>>> >>>>> On 8/22/08, Brian Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It may be a difference between different versions of SDL_ttf or of >>>>>> freetype, >>>>>> which may not be a bug if the new er behavior is part of a bug fix. >>>>>> >>>>>> So what version of SDL_ttf do you have on Windows and on Linux? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Charlie Nolan >>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I suspect this will just get passed upstream to SDL, but someone will >>>>>>> need to translate for them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The "7" glyph in the attached font at size 21 behaves inconsistently >>>>>>> on Windows (XP SP2) and Linux (Gentoo). Running the test script on >>>>>>> the two systems, I get these results: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Linux: >>>>>>> (11, 16) >>>>>>> (12, 16) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <Surface(22x16x32 SW)> >>>>>>> <Surface(22x16x32 SW)> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [(0, 9, 0, 8, 11), (0, 9, 0, 8, 11)] >>>>>>> [(0, 9, 0, 8, 11), (-1, 9, 0, 8, 11)] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Windows: >>>>>>> (11, 16) >>>>>>> (12, 16) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <Surface(22x16x32 SW)> >>>>>>> <Surface(23x16x32 SW)> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [(0, 10, 0, 8, 11), (0, 10, 0, 8, 11)] >>>>>>> [(0, 10, 0, 8, 11), (0, 11, 0, 8, 12)] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My interpretation of this is that the 7 is behaving a bit screwy at >>>>>>> that size. It renders as 12x16, but has an X offset of -1, for an >>>>>>> effective size of 11x16. On Windows, the X offset appears to be lost, >>>>>>> thus causing the glyph to incorrectly have an extra pixel of padding >>>>>>> on the left. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm also puzzled as to why maxx is one larger on Windows, but that >>>>>>> part doesn't seem to cause a problem. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
