[ft-devel] Math error? Spacing drastically different VS2005 to GNU/ARM (v2.4.4)
I've got the same code compiling in VS2005 and in a variant of a GNU ARM compiler. The fonts come out looking great under the Win32 build, but in the embedded ARM system, they are very widely spaced out. They're both little-endian 32-bit systems, using version 2.4.4, and it's using ftconfig.h from include/freetype/config for both systems. (also tried the unix version on the ARM system, but that didn't change anything) I had it print some information out, confirming that the struct sizes are the same on both systems. However, the ARM compiler is choosing not to define FT_INT64, so I assume it's using a different routine to calculate the slot->advance values. My question is: where should I look and/or what should I change, to make them act the same? In particular, it appears to me that the ARM system is doing some incorrect math from the metrics width value of 0x2C0 to get 0x800, but I'm having trouble identifying why this might be. Any help will be much appreciated -- I've burned several days looking for this so far. Below are some output messages created on both systems, and you'll see that horiAdvance comes out very different on the ARM system (both are looking at the metrics for capital 'A') --Win32 Output Opened font c:\Windows\Fonts\ARIALBD.TTF, size 16, sizeof(facerec) = 132 sizeof(FT_INT64) = 8 First 'A', sizeof(glyphslotrec)=160 FT_Get_Advance = 0x2C0 Metrics: width=0x2C0, height=0x300 Metrics: hAdvance=0x2C0, vAdvance=0x3C0 ---ARM Output-- Opened font ARIALBD.TTF, size 16, sizeof(facerec) = 132 FT_INT64 not defined! First 'A', sizeof(glyphslotrec)=160 FT_Get_Advance = 0x800 Metrics: width=0x2C0, height=0x300 Metrics: hAdvance=0x800, vAdvance=0x3C0 -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Math-error---Spacing-drastically-different-VS2005-to-GNU-ARM-%28v2.4.4%29-tp31373648p31373648.html Sent from the Freetype - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] Math error? Spacing drastically different VS2005 to GNU/ARM (v2.4.4)
> My question is: where should I look and/or what should I change, to > make them act the same? The FT_INT64 stuff is only used in a single file, `src/base/ftcalc.c'. However, AFAIK, the GNU C compiler always defines a 64bit data type (`long long int'), so I'm really surprised that you experience this problem. Perhaps this is different for GNU C on ARM? Can you try make devel make (from a fresh tarball) for compiling FreeType so that you bypass the `configure' script? Do you then get correct results for your demo application? Can you please also post the file `builds/unix/config.log' (compressed)? > In particular, it appears to me that the ARM system is doing some > incorrect math from the metrics width value of 0x2C0 to get 0x800, > but I'm having trouble identifying why this might be. Finally, can you decorate the various functions of ftcalc.c with some printf calls to find out where the difference comes from? Up to now, we've never received a similar problem report. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] Math error? Spacing drastically different VS2005 to GNU/ARM (v2.4.4)
>> In particular, it appears to me that the ARM system is doing some >> incorrect math from the metrics width value of 0x2C0 to get 0x800, >> but I'm having trouble identifying why this might be. > > Finally, can you decorate the various functions of ftcalc.c with > some printf calls to find out where the difference comes from? Up > to now, we've never received a similar problem report. Another possibility is that the ARM specific multiplication routines are buggy... I've just updated `builds/unix/ftconfig.in' with the additional assembler routines from `include/freetype/config/ftconfig.h', but this shouldn't make a difference for you, I believe. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] Math error? Spacing drastically different VS2005 to GNU/ARM (v2.4.4)
>>> In particular, it appears to me that the ARM system is doing some >>> incorrect math from the metrics width value of 0x2C0 to get 0x800, >>> but I'm having trouble identifying why this might be. >> >> Finally, can you decorate the various functions of ftcalc.c with >> some printf calls to find out where the difference comes from? Up >> to now, we've never received a similar problem report. > > Another possibility is that the ARM specific multiplication routines > are buggy... > I did also try compiling with assembler turned off -- I don't remember the preprocessor switch, but I did find it somewhere. It did not change the results. Todd ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] Math error? Spacing drastically different VS2005 to GNU/ARM (v2.4.4)
Thank you very much for your attention to this. The ARM stuff is on an embedded system, so I'll have to first figure out (a) how to cross-compile the things you requested (make devel; make) (b) how to support printf within freetype library I have been building it by adding the files to the ARM IDE I'm using, so whether the configure log is useful is dubious -- I sent that directly in a separate email. Since I have something somewhat working (if not optimally), I may have to go with that for now until I have time to get back to figuring out freetype. Todd -Original Message- From: Werner LEMBERG [mailto:w...@gnu.org] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 5:50 AM To: t...@spraguetech.com Cc: freetype-devel@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [ft-devel] Math error? Spacing drastically different VS2005 to GNU/ARM (v2.4.4) > My question is: where should I look and/or what should I change, to > make them act the same? The FT_INT64 stuff is only used in a single file, `src/base/ftcalc.c'. However, AFAIK, the GNU C compiler always defines a 64bit data type (`long long int'), so I'm really surprised that you experience this problem. Perhaps this is different for GNU C on ARM? Can you try make devel make (from a fresh tarball) for compiling FreeType so that you bypass the `configure' script? Do you then get correct results for your demo application? Can you please also post the file `builds/unix/config.log' (compressed)? > In particular, it appears to me that the ARM system is doing some > incorrect math from the metrics width value of 0x2C0 to get 0x800, > but I'm having trouble identifying why this might be. Finally, can you decorate the various functions of ftcalc.c with some printf calls to find out where the difference comes from? Up to now, we've never received a similar problem report. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
