Hi Martin, Yesterday I filed 8223869: Problem list java/awt/FontMetrics/MaxAdvanceIsMax.java on more platforms as I found it is excluded on solaris and mac already.
Thanks for the explanation. I will look at what freetype libs are used on the systems where this is failing. Maybe we should mark the test with @key intermittent if it depends on the system setup that much? Best regards, Goetz. > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Balao <mba...@redhat.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 6:41 PM > To: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenma...@sap.com>; 'Severin Gehwolf' > <sgehw...@redhat.com>; Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com>; > jdk-updates-...@openjdk.java.net > Cc: 2d-dev <2d-dev@openjdk.java.net>; build-...@openjdk.java.net; > Martin Balao Alonso <mbala...@redhat.com> > Subject: Re: [11u] java/awt/FontMetrics/MaxAdvanceIsMax.java test failure > (was: [11u] RFR 8210782: Upgrade HarfBuzz to the latest 2.3.1) > > Hi Goetz, > > On 5/13/19 1:38 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote: > > > > Can I somehow verify that it's the font that has the problem? > > Can I fix the font so that the test passes? > > > > I cannot say whether or not the static max advance value in each font is > right or not, but let's assume it is. The underlying problem here is > that OpenJDK uses a couple of internal FreeType library values to > calculate the effects of algorithmic bold and italic in the max advance > value -"algorithmic" means that the font is not italic or bold and is up > to the rendering engine to generate the desired effect-. These values > have changed over the years. What we did in 8218854 [1] was updating the > italic value to the latest version and supporting bold in the > calculation. Ideally, OpenJDK should not be tight to these values. > However, that's not easy to get rid of unless we change the API or the > API semantics. All this means that if you use OpenJDK 11 with an old > Free Type library, you may have different values and the test may fail. > > Note: this is just an hypothesis, I couldn't reproduce on my own. > > I believe the test assertion is right if we consider API semantics only > but we can put some constraints given reality. > > Kind regards, > Martin.- > > -- > [1] - http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/rev/0804f29e8be7 >
