On 2016/10/25 20:39:09, lemzwerg wrote:
> When you build current LilyPond, some TeX Gyre fonts are required.
> They are installed in LilyPond's directory.
> e.g. /usr/share/lilypond/current/fonts/otf
>
> Do you think that URW fonts should be installed in the same
directory?
Good question. May
>>> I've just tested successfully the following method, except item 1,
>>> which I've executed manually. [...]
>>
>> I've tried this way. [...]
>
> Thank you for your thorough testing, which obviously covers more
> situations than my limited tries.
>
> BTW, I see that your `extractpdfmark' tool
>> Do you have time to integrate this into lilypond in the near future?
>
> I would like so. My GUB environment can compile it for GUB inner
> using. (v1.0.0 could not compile.)
>
> But, I think that the integration requires a lot of time.
Why? Please elaborate.
Werner
For non-GUB, it might be difficult.
There are many variations of URW fonts.
e.g. difference of the name, with or without Greek and Cyrillic
glyphs, etc.
Hmm. Didn't we have a test that checks whether the URW fonts contain
Cyrillic glyphs? Maybe we should only install the new URW fonts
(locally
LGTM.
https://codereview.appspot.com/313930043/diff/1/lily/pfb.cc
File lily/pfb.cc (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/313930043/diff/1/lily/pfb.cc#newcode49
lily/pfb.cc:49: seglen |= (static_cast(*p++) << 24);
I suggest to add a guard against invalid, possibly extremely large
`seglen' valu
> At least, in order to avoid broken glyphs, we will need to change
> whether or not embedding by the font type.
OK, so the issue is not integrating `extractpdfmark' into lilypond but
adjusting lilypond's font handling to make it work.
> Moreover, we will need to change font resource directory
>
>>> Do you have time to integrate this into lilypond in the near future?
>>
>> I would like so. My GUB environment can compile it for GUB inner
>> using. (v1.0.0 could not compile.)
>>
>> But, I think that the integration requires a lot of time.
>
> Why? Please elaborate.
At least, in order
On 2016/10/26 11:46:15, lemzwerg wrote:
> For non-GUB, it might be difficult.
> There are many variations of URW fonts.
> e.g. difference of the name, with or without Greek and Cyrillic
glyphs, etc.
Hmm. Didn't we have a test that checks whether the URW fonts contain
Cyrillic
glyphs? Maybe
Reviewers: lemzwerg,
Message:
Thank you for your reviewing.
https://codereview.appspot.com/313930043/diff/1/lily/pfb.cc
File lily/pfb.cc (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/313930043/diff/1/lily/pfb.cc#newcode49
lily/pfb.cc:49: seglen |= (static_cast(*p++) << 24);
I suggest to add a guar
How about stringstream?
std::stringstream ss;
ss << std::hex << std::setw (2) << std::setfill ('0')
<< static_cast(static_cast(*p++));
out.push_back (ss.str[0]);
out.push_back (ss.str[1]);
Looks better to me, but I have no experience with the `stringstream'
class.
https://codereview.apps
Our checks can detect old URW fonts.
Current URW fonts cannot be detect.
Hmm, fontconfig collects information on a font's supported Unicode
blocks while adding it to the database. If we check that the URW fonts
are not Filippov's, but still support Cyrillic, we have the new ones,
right? Would
You were correct! I changed the order manually using doing something like:
bin/gub --fresh mingw::pkg-config
bin/gub --fresh mingw::zlib
Thanks for your help!
Jeremiah
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Masamichi Hosoda
wrote:
> > The host machine is 64 bit debian stable I believe.
> > This is th
12 matches
Mail list logo
