On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:07:19AM +0100, Huw Davies wrote:
---
fonts/wingding.sfd | 86 +
Please ignore this one and use 'try 2'.
I had the points of one glyph selected in the outline editor which
apparently gets saved to the .sfd .
Huw.
);
+vertical_count++;
That seems overly complicated. We already put the fonts in a list, it
shouldn't be hard to reorder it, or use a temp list for vertical fonts,
or something like that.
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq.org
Aric Stewart a...@codeweavers.com wrote:
+ascent = GET_BE_WORD(tt_os2.usWinAscent);
+descent = GET_BE_WORD(tt_os2.usWinDescent);
+cell_height = ascent + descent;
+ok(ntm-ntmCellHeight == cell_height, %s: ntmCellHeight %u != %u,
Akihiro Sagawa sagawa@gmail.com writes:
---
fonts/tahoma.sfd | 94
+-
fonts/tahoma.ttf | Bin 100420 - 97836 bytes
2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
We already have .notdef, we shouldn't need a second one
On Thu, 16 May 2013 17:09:40 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
fonts/tahoma.sfd | 94
+-
fonts/tahoma.ttf | Bin 100420 - 97836 bytes
2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
We already have .notdef, we shouldn't need
On 05/06/2013 03:05 PM, Max TenEyck Woodbury wrote:
Just to make this clear, the most recent version of this patch is such
a graceful handling, right?
I haven't worked on gdi32/freetype.c much, so I wouldn't be the one to
say for sure (you should probably talk to Alexandre Julliard, Dmitry
1f4934e24fe6a9c56a206519e7214ccf8a4a66b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Qian Hong fract...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 03:19:58 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] gdi32: Ignore fonts in enum_face_charsets if OpenFontFace
fails.
Reply-To: wine-devel@winehq.org
To: wine-patc...@winehq.org
---
dlls/gdi32/freetype.c | 17 +++--
1
Qian Hong fract...@gmail.com writes:
IMO the best solution is to correctly implement RemoveFontResource()
so Bug 8292 will be fixed, then we don't need to worry about the
broken test in usp10, which is the original reason for this patch.
Would you like me send this patch which is still an
Qian Hong fract...@gmail.com writes:
dlls/gdi32/freetype.c | 17 +++--
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
It's causing a test failure:
../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M gdiplus.dll -T ../../.. -p
gdiplus_test.exe.so font.c touch font.ok
font.c:400: Test
Austin English austinengl...@gmail.com wrote:
+ok(!lstrcmp(lf.lfFaceName, Arial) ||
+ !lstrcmp(lf.lfFaceName, Liberation Sans), wrong face name %s\n,
lf.lfFaceName);
The tests are supposed to reflect Windows behaviour, what Windows version
does return Liberation Sans in this test?
Windows behaviour, what Windows version
does return Liberation Sans in this test?
Obviously none, though it seems to a reasonable adjustment, since the
Liberation team can't use the Arial name. We already do something
similar in dlls/gdi32/freetype.c for liberation mono/sans/serif fonts.
--
-Austin
in this test?
Obviously none, though it seems to a reasonable adjustment, since the
Liberation team can't use the Arial name. We already do something
similar in dlls/gdi32/freetype.c for liberation mono/sans/serif fonts.
Just consider a failing test as a sign that something is broken in
the tested
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=21461
Your paranoid
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=21462
Your paranoid
Hello,
Please ignore this series of patch, I'll provide a fix for the failure test.
Dmitry Timoshkov dmi...@baikal.ru writes:
Any chance for at least a comment?
You did get a comment from Huw that you need to allocate extra bytes,
you still haven't done that AFAICS.
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq.org
this functionality (and uses various fonts with
different font sizes) works just fine with current approach. Besides,
status of the patches was New, both for the test and this implementation.
--
Dmitry.
. There are the tests,
and the app which needs this functionality (and uses various fonts with
different font sizes) works just fine with current approach.
Have you actually tested it with characters 32-pixel wide, and confirmed
that Windows messes them up the same way?
Besides,
status of the patches
Dmitry Timoshkov dmi...@baikal.ru writes:
Have you actually tested it with characters 32-pixel wide, and confirmed
that Windows messes them up the same way?
What I have done is a comparison of screenshots of the affected application
produced under Windows and Wine. If there will be a need in
Alexandre Julliard julli...@winehq.org wrote:
What I have done is a comparison of screenshots of the affected application
produced under Windows and Wine. If there will be a need in futher
improvements
I'll certainly have a look what can be enhanced.
Once again, have you explicitly
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Dmitry Timoshkov dmi...@baikal.ru wrote:
---
dlls/gdi32/freetype.c | 35 +++-
dlls/gdi32/tests/font.c | 83
++-
2 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
I don't know if this patch
Hello,
Any feedback on this patch?
--
Dmitry.
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 04:37:39PM +0900, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
diff --git a/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c b/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
index 0a5d3c3..eb3f9b5 100644
--- a/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
+++ b/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
@@ -5669,12 +5669,27 @@ static inline BYTE get_max_level( UINT format )
Huw Davies h...@codeweavers.com wrote:
Don't we need to add some bytes if glyph_width % 32 == 0 ?
Well, I didn't see in my tests a need for that.
--
Dmitry.
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 05:51:20PM +0900, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Huw Davies h...@codeweavers.com wrote:
Don't we need to add some bytes if glyph_width % 32 == 0 ?
Well, I didn't see in my tests a need for that.
That may be because your tests are just looking at the font metrics
and not
Huw Davies h...@codeweavers.com wrote:
Don't we need to add some bytes if glyph_width % 32 == 0 ?
Well, I didn't see in my tests a need for that.
That may be because your tests are just looking at the font metrics
and not at the glyphs themselves...
I have an application that
Forgot to note that this is a resend.
On Apr 4, 2012, at 5:40 PM, Ken Thomases wrote:
This reverts commit 85a71387dac1ca3ad47970800c8c01743681b528.
---
dlls/gdi32/freetype.c | 17 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
0001-Revert-gdi32-Load-fonts-from
android.
=== W2KPROSP4 (32 bit font) ===
font.c:4105: Test failed: AddFontResourceExA should add 2 fonts from
vertical.ttf
font.c:4083: Test failed: GetGlyphOutlineW failed
font.c:4108: Test failed: @WineTestVertical is not installed
font.c:4109: Test failed: @WineTestVertical is not selected
font.c
Hi,
While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures.
Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be
wrong, but could you please double-check?
Full results can be found at
http://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=15834
Your paranoid
Hi Per,
On 04-11-10 14:38, Per Olesen wrote:
Hi!
I am trying to figure out how wine reads fonts on startup but am having a little trouble.
I checked out the source and found a lot of good stuff in
winex11.drv/xfont.c, but I am not sure this is actually the code, that gets
executed when my
Hi!
I am trying to figure out how wine reads fonts on startup but am having a
little trouble. I checked out the source and found a lot of good stuff in
winex11.drv/xfont.c, but I am not sure this is actually the code, that gets
executed when my wine boots. What I experience, is that wine reads
There are a number of test failures due to hardcoded sizes in test
which fail for particular platforms, e.g.
http://test.winehq.org/data/6e89a61446088dbe029913896dfae467bb8d37a1/xp_wtb-wxpprojasp3/comctl32:toolbar.html
It seems the reason for this is that it is impossible to select the
system
Aric Stewart a...@codeweavers.com writes:
So return a proper error instead of generating unexpected garbage
---
dlls/usp10/usp10.c |5 -
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
It fails the tests:
../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M usp10.dll -T ../../.. -p
Along those lines, the hard drive space is cheap on this one. Seems
like Wine packagers could just include the fonts and install them
locally in c:\windows\fonts.
The Liberation fonts are GPL licensed, Wine is LGPL.
Is there a meaningful difference in the two licenses for fonts? LGPL
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Juan Lang juan.l...@gmail.com wrote:
Along those lines, the hard drive space is cheap on this one. Seems
like Wine packagers could just include the fonts and install them
locally in c:\windows\fonts.
The Liberation fonts are GPL licensed, Wine is LGPL
Is there a meaningful difference in the two licenses for fonts? LGPL
is necessary for code, which gets loaded at runtime to a closed-source
executable, but fonts contain no code, and thus aren't loaded.
A good point, but I'm not qualified to answer that. I suspect that the
SFC would be able
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Brian Vincent brian.vinc...@gmail.com wrote:
Along those lines, the hard drive space is cheap on this one. Seems
like Wine packagers could just include the fonts and install them
locally in c:\windows\fonts.
The Liberation fonts are GPL licensed, Wine is LGPL
Am 12.08.2010 06:11, schrieb Paul TBBle Hampson:
Sorry, I failed at Gmail again. _
-- Forwarded message --
From: Paul TBBle Hampson paul.hamp...@pobox.com
Date: 12 August 2010 13:52
Subject: Re: Should we expect Liberation fonts to be installed?
To: Scott Ritchie sc...@open
2010/8/12 André Hentschel n...@dawncrow.de:
Wow, can you please update http://wiki.winehq.org/FontLoadOrder with these
great informations?
I'm not sure that's the _best_ page for it (this isn't about font
loading, but font substitution) but I'll see about writing it all up
properly this
Sorry, I failed at Gmail again. _
-- Forwarded message --
From: Paul TBBle Hampson paul.hamp...@pobox.com
Date: 12 August 2010 13:52
Subject: Re: Should we expect Liberation fonts to be installed?
To: Scott Ritchie sc...@open-vote.org
On 8 August 2010 13:02, Scott Ritchie sc
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Scott Ritchie sc...@open-vote.org wrote:
This might work for Linux, but these fonts are not installed on any
MacOSX version that I'm aware of. This might break Wine useage for
Macs. It might also break it for Solaris as well.
It should only break in a way
On 08/08/2010 06:56 AM, James McKenzie wrote:
Scott Ritchie wrote:
I was looking through our fairly large collection of open font bugs and
realized that things might be a lot simpler if we took some opinionated
positions and just declared certain fonts to be dependencies and
expected all
On 08/03/2010 01:57 PM, Scott Ritchie wrote:
I was looking through our fairly large collection of open font bugs and
realized that things might be a lot simpler if we took some opinionated
positions and just declared certain fonts to be dependencies and
expected all packagers to provide them
I was looking through our fairly large collection of open font bugs and
realized that things might be a lot simpler if we took some opinionated
positions and just declared certain fonts to be dependencies and
expected all packagers to provide them.
This is similar to bundling our own Tahoma
Sans is installed on the system Photoshop won't try to
use it in place of Arial.
This is an excellent idea, except that the Liberation fonts are really
horrible. I've *tried* using them for general text use and they make
me want to gouge my eyes out.
Is there really no reasonable way to detect
fontconfig aliases, so even
though Liberation Sans is installed on the system Photoshop won't try to
use it in place of Arial.
This is an excellent idea, except that the Liberation fonts are really
horrible. I've *tried* using them for general text use and they make
me want to gouge my eyes
On Sun, 4 Jul 2010, Dan Kegel wrote:
The right place for winetricks feature requests is the winezeug issue tracker.
I've filed
http://code.google.com/p/winezeug/issues/detail?id=134
for the eu font update request.
The winezeug issue tracker requires a _Google_ email address! Who in
their
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010, Francois Gouget wrote:
[...]
The winezeug issue tracker requires a _Google_ email address! Who in
their right mind would want to create a new email account just to report
bugs on free software? Could you move winezeug to a more open hosting
provider?
My apologies. It
Hello,
Most fonts are missing some characters (S and T with a comma below, as
opposed to those with a cedilla; see [1] for a discussion) needed to
correctly represent some letters in the Romanian alphabet. Initially,
Windows XP did not include support for these characters, but it released
The right place for winetricks feature requests is the winezeug issue tracker.
I've filed
http://code.google.com/p/winezeug/issues/detail?id=134
for the eu font update request.
Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
--- On Fri, 5/2/10, Aric Stewart a...@codeweavers.com wrote:
Scott Ritchie wrote:
My notes from Wineconf remind me that I need to create
some manual links in the registry to whatever default CJK
fonts are on the system. Can someone tell me what
these are supposed
--- On Fri, 5/2/10, Aric Stewart a...@codeweavers.com wrote:
Scott Ritchie wrote:
My notes from Wineconf remind me that I need to create
some manual links in the registry to whatever default CJK
fonts are on the system. Can someone tell me what
these are supposed to look like?
Thanks
My notes from Wineconf remind me that I need to create some manual links
in the registry to whatever default CJK fonts are on the system. Can
someone tell me what these are supposed to look like?
Thanks,
Scott Ritchie
seems
to be important for the newer cleartype fonts. I'm just using plain
Times New Roman.
Updated information: if I load up gedit (the gnome text editor) and
tell it to use Times New Roman 12, it *is* anti-aliased (depending on
my settings in gnome-control-center). However, the exact same font
Hi all,
I'm using Microsoft Office 2002 under wine. According to the instructions here:
http://www.wine-reviews.net/wine-reviews/tips-n-tricks/how-to-enable-font-anti-aliasing-in-wine.html
...I've enabled font anti-aliasing, and it does work for fonts above a
particular point size. However
-aliasing, and it does work for fonts above a
particular point size. However, it seems to turn itself off below a
certain size. How can I configure the minimum font size at which to
allow anti-aliasing?
Try changing the dpi in winecfg.
--
-Austin
-to-enable-font-anti-aliasing-in-wine.html
...I've enabled font anti-aliasing, and it does work for fonts above a
particular point size. However, it seems to turn itself off below a
certain size. How can I configure the minimum font size at which to
allow anti-aliasing?
Try changing the dpi
-reviews/tips-n-tricks/how-to-enable-font-anti-aliasing-in-wine.html
...I've enabled font anti-aliasing, and it does work for fonts above a
particular point size. However, it seems to turn itself off below a
certain size. How can I configure the minimum font size at which to
allow anti-aliasing?
Try
. According to the
instructions here:
http://www.wine-reviews.net/wine-reviews/tips-n-tricks/how-to-enable-font-anti-aliasing-in-wine.html
...I've enabled font anti-aliasing, and it does work for fonts above a
particular point size. However, it seems to turn itself off below a
certain size
/how-to-enable-font-anti-aliasing-in-wine.html
...I've enabled font anti-aliasing, and it does work for fonts above a
particular point size. However, it seems to turn itself off below a
certain size. How can I configure the minimum font size at which to
allow anti-aliasing?
Try changing
to be important for the newer cleartype fonts. I'm just using plain
Times New Roman.
Updated information: if I load up gedit (the gnome text editor) and
tell it to use Times New Roman 12, it *is* anti-aliased (depending on
my settings in gnome-control-center). However, the exact same font
isn't anti-aliased
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009, Paul Chitescu wrote:
[...]
+courier-1250-96-13.fnt
[...]
+system-950-96-16.fnt
Git knows shell glob patterns so why not just a line:
*.fnt
Because that's less accurate. In particular, if we remove a font, the
corresponding .fnt file would still be ignored.
--
On Tuesday 25 August 2009 19:27:23 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov k...@mns.spb.ru
---
fonts/.gitignore | 58
++ 1 files changed, 58
insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fonts/.gitignore b/fonts/.gitignore
and icotool that
matter only to myself and to people working on fonts or icons; they are
irrelevant for end users. Asking users to enable maintainer mode is only
going to cause trouble for them.
--
Alexandre Julliard
julli...@winehq.org
--- Comment #3 from Alexandre Julliard julliard at winehq.org 2009-08-04
13:19:16 ---
Please don't suggest that people use the --enable-maintainer-mode flag, that's
not meant for normal users.
Then how can we be sure user have all requirements installed? --verbose
doesn't complain about
Aric Stewart a...@codeweavers.com wrote:
@@ -5792,6 +5792,9 @@ static BOOL load_child_font(GdiFont *font, CHILD_FONT
*child)
child-font-scale_y = font-scale_y;
hfontlist = HeapAlloc(GetProcessHeap(), 0, sizeof(*hfontlist));
hfontlist-hfont = CreateFontIndirectW(font-font_desc.lf);
load_child_font calls neither WineEngCreateFontInstance nor GetEnumStructs.
It allocates the the child font structure above in the function sets the
few fields it thinks it needs and then goes on. I see no evidence that
it is being expected to have been set at any other point.
-aric
Dmitry
Aric Stewart a...@codeweavers.com wrote:
load_child_font calls neither WineEngCreateFontInstance nor GetEnumStructs.
It allocates the the child font structure above in the function sets the
few fields it thinks it needs and then goes on. I see no evidence that
it is being expected to have
Thanks, resent.
-aric
Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
Aric Stewart a...@codeweavers.com wrote:
load_child_font calls neither WineEngCreateFontInstance nor
GetEnumStructs.
It allocates the the child font structure above in the function sets
the few fields it thinks it needs and then goes on. I see
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 05:51:45PM -0700, Lei Zhang wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Paul TBBle Hampson
paul.hamp...@pobox.com wrote:
This patch fixes bug 18044.
Basically, the built-in FontLink functionality for subsituting
alternative fonts where a certain font is missing glyphs
Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
This patch fixes bug 18044.
Basically, the built-in FontLink functionality for subsituting
alternative fonts where a certain font is missing glyphs (used
by default for Tahoma and Microsoft Sans Serif under Windows) doesn't
work if the font is loaded via
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 06:34:46PM -0700, James McKenzie wrote:
Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
This patch fixes bug 18044.
Where is the patch? I could not find it.
Apologies, will resend the email with the patch this time...
--
---
Paul
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Paul TBBle Hampson
paul.hamp...@pobox.com wrote:
This patch fixes bug 18044.
Basically, the built-in FontLink functionality for subsituting
alternative fonts where a certain font is missing glyphs (used
by default for Tahoma and Microsoft Sans Serif under
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Lei Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
This is sort of related to bug 16325. I've noticed some applications
use the MS Shell Dlg font to display CJK text and fails.
In HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\FontSubstitutes,
MS Shell Dlg is set to
see:
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12377
Am Dienstag, den 07.10.2008, 09:17 +0900 schrieb Dmitry Timoshkov:
Stefan Ziel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch is obviously wrong
may be, but the handling of symbol fonts in wine also is ;)
TranslateCharsetInfo does handle
This patch is obviously wrong
may be, but the handling of symbol fonts in wine also is ;)
TranslateCharsetInfo does handle SYMBOL_CHARSET, and code page
for symbol *is* defined.
its the charset-bits in fontinfo structure where most symbol fonts
set bit 31 (reserved for OEM in original
Stefan Ziel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch is obviously wrong
may be, but the handling of symbol fonts in wine also is ;)
TranslateCharsetInfo does handle SYMBOL_CHARSET, and code page
for symbol *is* defined.
its the charset-bits in fontinfo structure where most symbol fonts
Stefan Ziel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ignore characterset bit for symbol fonts
-if(!TranslateCharsetInfo((DWORD*)(INT_PTR)lf.lfCharSet, csi,
TCI_SRCCHARSET)) {
+if (lf.lfCharSet == SYMBOL_CHARSET){
+/* codepage for symbol is not definied - ignore it */
+csi.fs.fsCsb
I wasn't sure if I should post this to the devel or user list.
A coin toss decided on this one.
First of all, I'd like to praise the author of
the patch at http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2008-July/057033.html
for brilliance of simplicity. As I have all the fonts
I needed, it annoyed
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Scott Ritchie wrote:
[...]
On Ubuntu, the
liberation fonts also not installed by default. Which brings up a
related question: should the Wine package depend on them? It seems like
having liberation fonts available would be helpful to Wine, and
therefore they should
After being partially inspired by Ubuntu brainstorm, it occurred to me
that some of our fonts would be useful everywhere, but the current Wine
package keeps its fonts to itself. Tahoma, for instance, could be
useful if someone tries to open a Word document in Open Office.
The solution varies
Scott Ritchie wrote:
After being partially inspired by Ubuntu brainstorm, it occurred to me
that some of our fonts would be useful everywhere, but the current Wine
package keeps its fonts to itself. Tahoma, for instance, could be
useful if someone tries to open a Word document in Open Office
On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 13:20 +0100, Huw Davies wrote:
---
dlls/gdiplus/tests/font.c |7 +++
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
On my Windows system I can't find MSSansSerif, only Microsoft Sans
Serif. I'm not sure if that's a valid test to prove that point.
that point.
It's a bitmap font. The (latin version of the) font file is called
sserife.fon . Basically the FontFamily stuff relies on scalable
outlines, so gdiplus seems to simply ignore bitmap fonts.
It's also a hint that Wine's GdipGetGenericFontFamilySansSerif() is
incorrect
Igor Tarasov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
diff --git a/fonts/tahomabd.sfd b/fonts/tahomabd.sfd
index b9fdfa0..e42678a 100644
--- a/fonts/tahomabd.sfd
+++ b/fonts/tahomabd.sfd
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-SplineFontDB: 1.0
+SplineFontDB: 2.0
As I pointed out many times this is a fatal change, please leave
Huw Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fonts/Makefile.in |1 +
fonts/symbol.sfd | 83
+
Upgrading fontforge fixed the gdi32 errors, but now I'm getting errors
in usp10:
../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M usp10.dll -T ../../.. -p
Huw Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
---
fonts/Makefile.in |1 +
fonts/symbol.sfd | 83
+
2 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 fonts/symbol.sfd
It fails make test for me:
../../../tools/runtest
Hans Leidekker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Changelog
Do glyph translation for truetype fonts only.
This fails here:
../../../tools/runtest -q -P wine -M usp10.dll -T ../../.. -p usp10_test.exe.so
usp10.c touch usp10.ok
usp10.c:217: Test failed: Translation to place when told not to. WCHAR 0
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 06:54:05PM +0900, Aric Stewart wrote:
I added a number of the black boxes to the 18 pixel strike (the range
before 161) and fontforge seemed unhappy if i did not add something to
the 16 pixel one. (maybe it was my misinterperting fontforge) but so i
added similar
Aric Stewart wrote:
---
fonts/system.sfd | 1587
+-
1 files changed, 1341 insertions(+), 246 deletions(-)
You seem to have changed a couple of glyphs in the 16 pixel strike too.
Was that on purpose (and if so shouldn't it be a separate
:
Aric Stewart wrote:
---
fonts/system.sfd | 1587
+-
1 files changed, 1341 insertions(+), 246 deletions(-)
You seem to have changed a couple of glyphs in the 16 pixel strike too.
Was that on purpose (and if so shouldn't
Huw Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
--- a/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
+++ b/dlls/gdi32/freetype.c
@@ -2109,6 +2109,7 @@ BOOL WineEngInit(void)
/* load the system truetype fonts */
data_dir = wine_get_data_dir();
+if(!data_dir) data_dir = wine_get_build_dir();
This causes
Chris Robinson wrote:
On Wednesday 03 October 2007 04:15:17 am Huw Davies wrote:
---
fonts/.gitignore |1 +
fonts/Makefile.in |3 +-
fonts/tahoma.sfd |10850
+ 3 files changed,
10853 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
create mode
On Saturday 06 October 2007 04:13:18 am Huw Davies wrote:
Nice ;-/
The new Tahoma doesn't contain any TrueType hinting instructions, so there
are several sets of bitmaps that get used at small font sizes. It's
possible winecfg is trying to use a font size for which we don't have a
bitmap
On Wednesday 03 October 2007 04:15:17 am Huw Davies wrote:
---
fonts/.gitignore |1 +
fonts/Makefile.in |3 +-
fonts/tahoma.sfd |10850
+ 3 files changed,
10853 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 fonts/tahoma.sfd
it is not available we would either need
an #ifdef in AddFileToList (what IMHO wouldn't be nice) or in such a
case define the symbol ourselfs. But if we will need to define the
symbol then why to include the header?
+#define WINEENG_SFNTTAG_CFF 0x43464620 /* stores the outline for Type1 OTF
fonts
Dmitry Timoshkov pisze:
Mikolaj Zalewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then there is no point in using FreeType for loading font files at all,
(or adding support for new font file formats to FreeType) since
FreeType
can load fonts from memory.
Do you mean that in AddFontResource I shouldn't try
Mikolaj Zalewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then there is no point in using FreeType for loading font files at all,
(or adding support for new font file formats to FreeType) since
FreeType
can load fonts from memory.
Do you mean that in AddFontResource I shouldn't try to call
Mikolaj Zalewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I wrote in Bugzilla for Photoshop to work with Type1 fonts after
applying this patch one needs to reinstall Photoshop in a clean
wineprefix - it seems that Photoshop caches some font data.
+/* check for the presence of the 'CFF ' table
Then there is no point in using FreeType for loading font files at all,
(or adding support for new font file formats to FreeType) since FreeType
can load fonts from memory.
Do you mean that in AddFontResource I shouldn't try to call
WineEngAddFontResourceEx but do only a LoadLibraryEx
1 - 100 of 283 matches
Mail list logo
