On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 04:01:15PM -0400, Michael Shell wrote: > On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 01:41:18 +0100 > Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I've just had the opportunity to compare /etc/fonts/fonts.conf in > > 7.9 and 7.10. Yes, they do differ in size by about 3.5K. The > > reason is that the table of valid blank characters almost at the end > > of the file has been removed. > . > . > > I'm puzzled why the absence of that table would alter things for an > > English speaker running LFS ... > > > Ken, > > Watch out - both those config files load all the links in > /etc/fonts/conf.d: > > <!-- Load local system customization file --> > <include ignore_missing="yes">conf.d</include> > > So, we've also got to compare the list of the links in /etc/fonts/conf.d as > well as what is in (or just the sizes) the config files those links are > pointing to /etc/fonts/conf.avail > > This is likely where the difference resides. > > > Cheers, > > Mike > True, a quick diff didn't highlight that. My 7.10 desktop is powered off at the moment, and those symlinks actually point to /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail in my case - I looked at my first-stage backups, in /staging on my server, but of course the links are broken when I do that.
A (very) quick look yesterday suggested the symlinks on my 7.9 and 7.10 were the same, but I won't swear that they are (more than a screenful using ls -l). But - assuming all the 10-hinting* symlinks are present, the contents of those files DID change between BLFS-7.9 and 7.10. ĸen -- `I shall take my mountains', said Lu-Tze. `The climate will be good for them.' -- Small Gods -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
