Bug#573983: Yet again some more information...
Hi again, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: > But well, from what I see, it's just necessary a new upload reverting the > patch. > Agreed on this? I can't get my quick-and-dirty thing to work, so the revert is probably the simplest thing to do. Most of the information I was writing is therefore not really useful. You could try leaving only helvetica as known type, that should work. Cheers, Vincent, eager to be able to upload librmagick-ruby ;-)... -- Vincent Fourmond, Debian Developer http://vince-debian.blogspot.com/ If you put a large switch in some cave somewhere, with a sign on it saying "End-of-the-World switch. PLEASE DO NOT TOUCH", the paint wouldn't even have the time to dry. -- Terry Pratchet, Thief of Time Vincent, listening to Grateful Parting (Rabih Abou-Khalil) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#573983: Yet again some more information...
Hi all, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: > One thing that I don't understand however (and if somebody knows why, > I would be grateful for an explanation) is why fontconfig/imagemagick > doesn't see the ghostscripts fonts (and why it's necessary to > explicitly include them in type.xml). Argh ! I was just writing up a long mail explaining that, in part. I'll send it along in a few minutes. The thing is that the font "helvetica" doesn't exist as such for fontconfig, but through something like a matching mechanism: ~ fc-match helvetica n019003l.pfb: "Nimbus Sans L" "Regular" The *real* font behind is Nimbus-Sans (in my case, but see the mail I'll send in a minute). To do well, on would have to use the equivalent of fc-match somewhere around the place where imagemagick falls back onto Helvetica as default. I don't have any idea of how to do that, but I'm pretty sure upstream would. > But well, from what I see, it's just necessary a new upload reverting the > patch. > Agreed on this? I'm currently trying using Nimbus-Sans as a fix; it should help us getting it working, I think, as a quick fix I'll keep you posted (in the long mail) as soon as the build is finished. > Thank you very much! > And sorry for the mess. Don't bother; packages sometimes show much more intricate dependencies as one would ever had expected... Cheers ! Vincent -- Vincent Fourmond, Debian Developer http://vince-debian.blogspot.com/ Some pirates achieved immortality by great deeds of cruelty and derring-do. Some achieved immortality by amassing great wealth. But the captain had long ago decided that he would, on the whole, prefer to achieve immortality by not dying. -- Terry Pratchet, the Colour of Magic Vincent, listening to The Sad Women of Qana (Rabih Abou-Khalil) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#573983: RE : [Pkg-gmagick-im-team] Bug#573983: Yet again some more information...
I do not agree i thuink it worth to report upstream Bastien Le 16 mars 2010 21:52, "Nelson A. de Oliveira" a écrit : Hi! On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > I've just built and installed a set of local imagemagick packages with > the suggested patch from upstream (adding "Utopia" as an alternative > font family) and I'm afraid I have to report that I still get the same > problem: (...) > If there's any further information I can provide to help, please let me > know. I'm sure you'd like to get the imagemagick transition finished as > quickly as I would. :-) Sure :-) On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote: > I don't know who'... Maybe you need to blame me? :-) >From [1] and from [2] we thought that by distributing an "empty" type.xml, ImageMagick would be able to use the system fonts. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/396420 [2] http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15355 It seems that we didn't saw that ImageMagick was already using the system fonts PLUS the ghostscript ones (by explicitly including them in type.xml) [it could be true that on 2006 ImageMagick didn't had support for fontconfig, but now it has and it reads the system fonts] So I was wrong in understanding that ImageMagick wasn't reading the fonts now. One thing that I don't understand however (and if somebody knows why, I would be grateful for an explanation) is why fontconfig/imagemagick doesn't see the ghostscripts fonts (and why it's necessary to explicitly include them in type.xml). But well, from what I see, it's just necessary a new upload reverting the patch. Agreed on this? Thank you very much! And sorry for the mess. Best regards, Nelson ___ Pkg-gmagick-im-team mailing list pkg-gmagick-im-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-gmagick-im-team
Bug#573983: Yet again some more information...
Hi! On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > I've just built and installed a set of local imagemagick packages with > the suggested patch from upstream (adding "Utopia" as an alternative > font family) and I'm afraid I have to report that I still get the same > problem: (...) > If there's any further information I can provide to help, please let me > know. I'm sure you'd like to get the imagemagick transition finished as > quickly as I would. :-) Sure :-) On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote: > I don't know who's to blame: how comes helvetica doesn't show up in > fontconfig ? gs-fonts are installed, which is where it should be coming, > shouldn't it ? Maybe you need to blame me? :-) >From [1] and from [2] we thought that by distributing an "empty" type.xml, ImageMagick would be able to use the system fonts. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/396420 [2] http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15355 It seems that we didn't saw that ImageMagick was already using the system fonts PLUS the ghostscript ones (by explicitly including them in type.xml) [it could be true that on 2006 ImageMagick didn't had support for fontconfig, but now it has and it reads the system fonts] So I was wrong in understanding that ImageMagick wasn't reading the fonts now. One thing that I don't understand however (and if somebody knows why, I would be grateful for an explanation) is why fontconfig/imagemagick doesn't see the ghostscripts fonts (and why it's necessary to explicitly include them in type.xml). But well, from what I see, it's just necessary a new upload reverting the patch. Agreed on this? Thank you very much! And sorry for the mess. Best regards, Nelson -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#573983: Yet again some more information...
Hi again, I think I have a better idea of what is happening: if I use one of the fonts listed by ~ convert -list font I get no error, and the output looks fine. Looking closer, I find that there are several fonts missing from the newer version of imagemagick, namely, the postscript fonts: diff im-fontlist.old im-fontlist.new 1,8d0 < Font: AvantGarde-Book < Font: AvantGarde-BookOblique < Font: AvantGarde-Demi < Font: AvantGarde-DemiOblique < Font: Bookman-Demi < Font: Bookman-DemiItalic < Font: Bookman-Light < Font: Bookman-LightItalic 53,56d44 < Font: Courier < Font: Courier-Bold < Font: Courier-BoldOblique < Font: Courier-Oblique 64,72d51 < Font: fixed < Font: Helvetica < Font: Helvetica-Bold < Font: Helvetica-BoldOblique < Font: Helvetica-Narrow < Font: Helvetica-Narrow-Bold < Font: Helvetica-Narrow-BoldOblique < Font: Helvetica-Narrow-Oblique < Font: Helvetica-Oblique 177,180d155 < Font: NewCenturySchlbk-Bold < Font: NewCenturySchlbk-BoldItalic < Font: NewCenturySchlbk-Italic < Font: NewCenturySchlbk-Roman 197,200d171 < Font: Palatino-Bold < Font: Palatino-BoldItalic < Font: Palatino-Italic < Font: Palatino-Roman 202,206d172 < Font: Symbol < Font: Times-Bold < Font: Times-BoldItalic < Font: Times-Italic < Font: Times-Roman I think I've understood the problem: when a font isn't found, imagemagick falls back onto using helvetica (line 1032 of magick/annotate.c). On the older imagemagick, as the postscript fonts were automatically included with @type_include_files@ there was no problems. On the newer version, Helvetica is missing, so it isn't found at all. That's pretty bad for the default font ! I don't know who's to blame: how comes helvetica doesn't show up in fontconfig ? gs-fonts are installed, which is where it should be coming, shouldn't it ? At least I feel we are progressing... Cheers, Vincent -- Vincent Fourmond, Debian Developer http://vince-debian.blogspot.com/ The Librarian was, of course, very much in favour of reading in general, but readers in particular got on his nerves. -- Terry Pratchet, Men at arms Vincent, listening to The Whores Hustle And The Hustlers Whore (PJ Harvey) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
