Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: enabling bytecode interpreter makes things far, far worse
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Summary: enabling bytecode interpreter makes things far, far worse Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: high Priority: low Component: freetype AssignedTo: besfahbo@redhat.com ReportedBy: mattdm@mattdm.org QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: besfahbo@redhat.com, kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org, fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com Classification: Fedora
It's cool that the patent expiration lets us enable the bytecode interpreter.
However, there's a severe flaw -- if there's no bytecode, apparently freetype doesn't hint at all.
I use Inconsolata as my terminal font, and it normally looks great. After the update, it got all fuzzy and basically unusable. This is sadly true for a great many very nice fonts.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Tomasz Torcz zdzichu@irc.pl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zdzichu@irc.pl
--- Comment #1 from Tomasz Torcz zdzichu@irc.pl 2009-12-14 16:33:46 EDT --- Could you provide some before and after screenshots?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #2 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2009-12-14 16:38:35 EDT --- Indeed, I hinted (no pun intended) at this problem on the mailing list. Freetype really needs to be fixed to fallback to the autohinter where no hinting bytecode is provided.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #3 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2009-12-14 16:49:07 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=378369) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=378369) Without bytecode
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #4 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2009-12-14 16:49:30 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=378370) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=378370) With bytecode
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #5 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2009-12-14 16:52:07 EDT --- That's with medium hinting enabled, by the way. No sub-pixel rendering.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|enabling bytecode |freetype with the bytecode |interpreter makes things |interpreter enabled falls |far, far worse |back to no hinting instead | |of autohinting when no | |hinting bytecode is | |available
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #6 from Behdad Esfahbod besfahbo@redhat.com 2009-12-14 22:44:02 EDT --- Can someone please bring this upstream?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #7 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2009-12-14 23:26:14 EDT --- Upstreaming and getting the issue fixed is a great long-term approach. However, I also think we should revert this change until that is in place, as it significantly degrades the user experience. (Hence the original summary of this issue and its focus on that, rather than on the underlying problem.)
I took a quick look at the source, and src/base/ftobjs.c has a section with a big comment starting "Determine whether we need to auto-hint or not" -- it seems like it's _probably_ no big deal to add the appropriate logic there.
There's also some code in src/truetype/ttobjs.c which decides if a crippled (patent-safe) version of the bytecode interpreter needs to be used for a specific font (apparently some need it to even load properly). This sets a flag which the ftobjs.c code later uses....
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|high |low
--- Comment #8 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2009-12-14 23:41:39 EDT --- So, in that comment and code, I found that if the hinting mode is set to "LIGHT" instead of medium, the auto-hinter _is_ used. And experimentation bears this out.
That explains why not everyone is immediately fussing about this, and I suppose takes some of the urgency out of the equation.
Still, there's a definite regression: medium and heavy hinting modes should not mean "no hinting!".
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #9 from Behdad Esfahbod besfahbo@redhat.com 2009-12-14 23:42:36 EDT --- I see. And since this is in rawhide only, lets not revert and fix it properly.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #10 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net 2009-12-15 10:44:07 EDT --- There are also the problems of: 1. the many partially hinted fonts that exist : the bytecode interpreter should be used for hinted glyphs, and the autohinter for others, preferably at a setting consistent with whet the bytecode interpreter does 2. the way bytecode interracts with fontconfig/gnome smoothing preferences: with bytecode on, you need to change the gnome prefs to get the closest approximation of the previous settings. It does not autoset the closest one itself (this is going to annoy a lot of users)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #11 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2009-12-15 10:49:02 EDT --- The second part of "1" from comment #10 sounds a bit hard.
It's okay to leave it on for rawhide, but we should have a plan to revert if the upstream fixes can't be in place in time.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
James Cloos cloos@jhcloos.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |cloos@jhcloos.com
--- Comment #12 from James Cloos cloos@jhcloos.com 2009-12-21 18:18:10 EDT --- Suitable fontconfig scripts can help here.
I use these two scripts to force the autofitter for non-glyf fonts (there is an open rfe for freetype to replace the type1/cff hinting module with one which uses the autofit module, but taking advantage of the type1/cff hints; this would be an excellent project for anyone who wants to delve into font rasterization techniques) and to set the filtering to match the chosen hinting option.
Combined with fc code akin to:
<!-- cut here --> <match target="font"> <test name="family"> <string>VL Gothic</string> </test> <edit name="autohint" mode="assign"> <bool>true</bool> </edit> </match> <!-- and here -->
one can force the autofitter for some glyf fonts and use the bci for others.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #13 from James Cloos cloos@jhcloos.com 2009-12-21 18:23:09 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=379733) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=379733) Fontconfig conf file to set hintstyle based on each font’s format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #14 from James Cloos cloos@jhcloos.com 2009-12-21 18:25:27 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=379737) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=379737) Fontconfig conf file to set LCD filter based on each font’s format and hintstyle
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #15 from James Cloos cloos@jhcloos.com 2009-12-21 18:28:55 EDT --- Forgot to say:
I’d be optimistic that a patch for freetype, which enabled the autofit module for glyphs of an SFNT/glyf font which lack instructions, would get accepted, provided it matched ft’s coding style.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #16 from Behdad Esfahbod besfahbo@redhat.com 2010-02-23 17:11:11 EST --- Ok, reported upstream (always surprises me how people are willing to leave multiple comments on the downstream bug but not bother reporting upstream).
If we don't get a fix, I'll just revert. I don't have the time to fix it myself.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #17 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2010-02-23 18:49:21 EST ---
Ok, reported upstream (always surprises me how people are willing to leave multiple comments on the downstream bug but not bother reporting upstream).
That's one of the functions of a packager. We assume you have a working relationship with the developers of the package you're taking care of, and a perhaps a basic knowledge of the code -- which is often vital in such interactions.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #18 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2010-02-23 23:08:57 EST --- Usually the person experiencing the bug is the most appropriate person to report this bug upstream, the packager as a middleman is not an effective solution for communication. So as a general rule, we expect users to file upstream bugs themselves.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #19 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2010-02-24 00:06:14 EST --- On the contrary -- often the person experiencing the bug has no experience with dealing with the particular upstream project, and is actually quite poorly situated to communicate with that project. The reporter may just want their system to work, and not care to learn the intricacies of font rendering mathematics. I think the *general* rule is that package maintainers work with upstream to improve the software in various ways.
Particularly, I was struck by this as it relates to a comment in a recent LWN.net article on FOSDEM, which quotes someone speaking about another popular Linux distro thusly:
[Popular Distro] users that want to file a bug, have the choice between three options. They can file a bug upstream, where they might get flamed; they can file a bug in [Popular Disto's Parent Distro], where they are very likely to get flamed; or they can file a bug in [Popular Distro]'s [Bug Tracker], where there are very likely to get ignored.
But in this specific bug, the upstream issue is basically separate. The issue *here* is that a specfile change caused a regression. Getting the option that was turned on working properly may be interesting for upstream (or not), and presumably i*s* interesting to the packager who changed the specfile to enable it in the first place (or else, why do it?). On the other hand, for the reporter, and for Fedora in general, what's immediately interesting is fixing the regression (so that Fedora 13 doesn't have ugly fonts).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #20 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2010-02-25 15:50:11 EST --- Sorry for the late-night ran. Not meaning to be anti-constructive or to imply that this bug had been ignored. Just wanted to respond to Behdad comment about surprise, which was probably best done out-of-band if at all. So, again, apologies. Let's just get fonts looking nice again.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #21 from Behdad Esfahbod besfahbo@redhat.com 2010-03-03 17:23:41 EST --- Ok, given upstream discussion I'm disabling bci for f13.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #22 from Behdad Esfahbod besfahbo@redhat.com 2010-03-03 17:28:30 EST --- Leaving open since this still is an issue on rawhide.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-03-03 17:48:44 EST --- freetype-2.3.11-3.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freetype-2.3.11-3.fc13
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ON_QA
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-03-03 20:33:40 EST --- freetype-2.3.11-3.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update freetype'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F13/FEDORA-2010-3607
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-03-10 01:39:51 EST --- freetype-2.3.11-3.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |freetype-2.3.11-3.fc13 Resolution| |ERRATA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|ERRATA |
--- Comment #26 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2010-03-10 08:48:36 EST --- Reopening for rawhide as per comment #22.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #27 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2010-03-10 08:49:08 EST --- (And thanks for the reversion for F13.)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |612395
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Michael Monreal michael.monreal+bugs@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |michael.monreal+bugs@gmail. | |com
--- Comment #29 from Michael Monreal michael.monreal+bugs@gmail.com 2010-07-19 13:45:39 EDT --- Did anyone check the latest fontconfig yet? According to recent news stories, upstream now enables the bytecode interpreter by default... so can we assume the issues mentioned here are fixed?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #30 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2010-07-19 13:57:23 EDT --- I'm guessing we can assume that Free/OSS fonts are going to look awful for everyone now, not just Rawhide users. That's probably a good thing in the long term, since there will be more incentive to fix it.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|13 |rawhide
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Carl G. carl.gaudreault@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |carl.gaudreault@gmail.com
--- Comment #32 from Carl G. carl.gaudreault@gmail.com 2010-08-20 17:19:38 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16)
Ok, reported upstream (always surprises me how people are willing to leave multiple comments on the downstream bug but not bother reporting upstream).
If we don't get a fix, I'll just revert. I don't have the time to fix it myself.
Could you provide the upstream bug ID please?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #33 from Fedora Admin XMLRPC Client fedora-admin-xmlrpc@redhat.com 2010-09-22 09:54:52 EDT --- This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Fedora Admin XMLRPC Client fedora-admin-xmlrpc@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|behdad@fedoraproject.org |mkasik@redhat.com
--- Comment #34 from Fedora Admin XMLRPC Client fedora-admin-xmlrpc@redhat.com 2010-09-22 10:00:01 EDT --- This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #35 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-02-17 10:24:56 EST --- This huge patchset: http://www.infinality.net/blog/ (which mostly enables patent-encumbered stuff and causes bugs such as bug 674311, so it shouldn't be merged as a whole) has an "auto-autohint" feature which does what's being asked for here. (But AFAICT it's disabled by default and enabled by a special settings package they have.)
I can try to cherry-pick the relevant changes.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #36 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-02-17 10:35:38 EST --- Created attachment 479352 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=479352 Patch for this issue from infinality.net
OK, so I checked, the auto-autohint feature is an almost trivial patch. I'm attaching the patch. (And it's actually always enabled, that option they're setting must be a dummy that's not actually implemented as an option.)
Can we: 1. apply this, 2. enable the (no longer patented) BCI in our packages and 3. finally close this bug now?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #37 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2011-02-17 10:38:14 EST --- Thanks Kevin. That'd be awesome.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|low |unspecified Keywords|Reopened | Platform|All |i686 Blocks|612395 | AssignedTo|mkasik@redhat.com |caolanm@redhat.com Summary|freetype with the bytecode |[abrt] crash in freetype's |interpreter enabled falls |_lcd_stem_align |back to no hinting instead | |of autohinting when no | |hinting bytecode is | |available | Status Whiteboard| |abrt_hash:c52afa88c39fb0aa4 | |870d02e4e37dc506367fea2 Severity|low |unspecified OS/Version|Linux |Unspecified
--- Comment #38 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-02-17 10:41:30 EST --- Actually, the package I looked at was an old package. The current version does have the option, and it has it all inside a huge patch. But I think the simple patch from the old version (preferably fixed to be indented properly and to remove the commented-out portion) is what we really want.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #39 from Behdad Esfahbod behdad@fedoraproject.org 2011-02-17 10:55:36 EST --- Humm, Kevin, why did you change the bug summary?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #479352|0 |1 is obsolete| |
--- Comment #40 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-02-17 11:16:15 EST --- Created attachment 479362 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=479362 Cleaned up version of infinality.net auto-autohint patch
This version of the patch is cleaned up to: 1. drop the commented-out junk, 2. respect the indentation and whitespace style of the surrounding code, 3. rename face2 to ttface and 4. check FT_IS_SFNT before trying to use ttface members (probably not strictly needed because only TrueType has a native hinter at all and there's a check for FT_DRIVER_HAS_HINTER at the higher-level if clause, but I think it's better to write safe code).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #41 from Behdad Esfahbod behdad@fedoraproject.org 2011-02-17 11:29:18 EST --- Please send this upstream for consideration.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|unspecified |low Keywords| |Reopened Platform|i686 |All Blocks| |612395 AssignedTo|caolanm@redhat.com |mkasik@redhat.com Summary|[abrt] crash in freetype's |freetype with the bytecode |_lcd_stem_align |interpreter enabled falls | |back to no hinting instead | |of autohinting when no | |hinting bytecode is | |available Status Whiteboard|abrt_hash:c52afa88c39fb0aa4 | |870d02e4e37dc506367fea2 | Severity|unspecified |low OS/Version|Unspecified |Linux
--- Comment #42 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-02-17 11:33:47 EST --- Funky Bugzilla glitch there, I fixed the tags for this bug, they got copied from another bug somehow.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #43 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-02-17 12:02:26 EST --- Upstream patch submission: https://savannah.nongnu.org/patch/index.php?7471
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #44 from Marek Kašík mkasik@redhat.com 2011-02-18 04:52:51 EST --- Hi Kevin,
thank you for the preparation of the patch and its submission. I'll follow up the upstream bug and push it to Fedora then. Since this is quite big change in almost every application having GUI, I would push it to Fedora 15 and rawhide only. Do you agree?
Marek
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #45 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-02-18 10:05:41 EST --- Yeah, that's probably safest. Especially our default fonts, Deja Vu, are infamous for looking somewhat different with the BCI.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Marek Kašík mkasik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED Version|14 |15 Fixed In Version|freetype-2.3.11-3.fc13 |freetype-2.4.4-3.fc15
--- Comment #46 from Marek Kašík mkasik@redhat.com 2011-02-20 07:31:36 EST --- Hi,
I've committed the patch to Fedora 15 and rawhide.
Marek
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #47 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-02-20 07:39:52 EST --- freetype-2.4.4-3.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freetype-2.4.4-3.fc15
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #48 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-02-20 22:20:49 EST --- freetype-2.4.4-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update freetype'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freetype-2.4.4-3.fc15
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #49 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-07 21:27:29 EST --- freetype-2.4.4-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed|2010-03-10 01:39:58 |2011-03-07 21:27:47
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #50 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-03-08 04:55:06 EST --- There's a followup fix from upstream: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/commit/?id=c9bdfa7e6...
Shouldn't we apply that, too?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #51 from Marek Kašík mkasik@redhat.com 2011-03-08 06:35:32 EST --- (In reply to comment #50)
There's a followup fix from upstream: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/commit/?id=c9bdfa7e6...
Shouldn't we apply that, too?
Yes, we should. I'll apply it today.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #52 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-08 11:41:35 EST --- freetype-2.4.4-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freetype-2.4.4-4.fc15
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #53 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-09 22:07:37 EST --- freetype-2.4.4-4.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |drizt@land.ru
--- Comment #54 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-05 08:37:41 EDT --- Hello! This patches broked my Liberation Serif font. before http://img.flashtux.org/upload/img132dd0d22a00x1787d7d1.png after http://img.flashtux.org/upload/img132dd0d22c5bx7a383f44.png
Can reopen bug? Or i should make new?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #55 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-06-05 10:24:52 EDT --- Fonts may look different with the bytecode interpreter enabled. This is not a bug. See also: https://kevinkofler.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/hint-how-to-force-autohinting-o...
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #56 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-05 11:19:39 EDT --- Thanks! It works.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #57 from Matthew Miller mattdm@mattdm.org 2011-06-05 16:25:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #55)
Fonts may look different with the bytecode interpreter enabled. This is not a bug.
Different isn't a bug. Horribly ugly when they weren't before _is_.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532
--- Comment #58 from Kevin Kofler kevin@tigcc.ticalc.org 2011-06-05 16:34:21 EDT --- Well, that is an issue you will have to take up with the font's designers and/or maintainers. You can't really blame Freetype for rendering the font the way the designers programmed it.
fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org