Follow-up Comment #35, bug #63808 (project groff): [comment #29 comment #29:] > Hi Deri, > > My diagnosis in comment #28 appears to have been correct. > > There is a problem with checking all 35 fonts in the default foundry for gropdf in the "urw absent, gs present" scenario. > > It seems the non-base-14 font descriptions are not being copied to font/devpdf/
I referred to this in comment #12, you hobbled your test to make it pass! And now you want to hobble it again:- > So I guess this means that maybe the check-default-foundry.sh test needs to be re-hobbled. Wow!! Aren't you interested to work out why it only fails on your system? I would guess it may be to do with you making the urw-fonts ”unavailable" to do a ghostscript only run, thus making your links dangle, rather than a foul debian plot! If I look at libgs9-common it has fonts-urw-base35 as a dependency:- dietpi@tvhnew:~ $ apt show libgs9-common Package: libgs9-common Version: 9.53.3~dfsg-7+deb11u2 Priority: optional Section: libs Source: ghostscript Maintainer: Debian Printing Team <debian-print...@lists.debian.org> Installed-Size: 3,108 kB Depends: fonts-urw-base35 (>= 20200910) Recommends: fonts-droid-fallback Homepage: https://www.ghostscript.com/ Tag: role::shared-lib Download-Size: 734 kB APT-Manual-Installed: no APT-Sources: https://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye/main arm64 Packages Description: interpreter for the PostScript language and for PDF - common files > I think what this is is establishing is that the presence of the "gs" command is a bad proxy for the presence of downloadable font file. Did you think it was? No, it has always been a way of harvesting paths which may contain suitable fonts. > Distributors like Debian go out of their way to ensure that you can have that executable on the system without the fonts being present. I have seen evidence to the contrary, debian make the fonts a dependency of ghostscript. Due to your testing methodology, you divorced the fonts from ghostscript. > And if the fonts are built into the executable--if I remember correctly, this is the %rom% thing--then we don't have a good way of knowing whether this is the case. Not without writing a much more elaborate Autoconf test that really uses Ghostscript to generate a PostScript document and then parses it, perhaps. I don't think I've seen the %rom% for 20 years and with the speed of modern SSDs I can't really see anyone resurrecting it. I don't see how you you could determine whether the original source of a font came from accessing a file or internally by parsing postscript! > Bertrand said he's available to tag RC3 tomorrow so what I think I will do is internally modify check-default-foundry.sh to have two tests: one for the base 14+EURO and one for the rest. The test will be skipped if the remainder are missing. Maybe that will be enough of a clue to check things out for the user who goes to the trouble of running "make check" at all. This does not make any sense you are hobbling check-default-foundry.sh, so that it does not fail if someone deletes/renames their fonts. If they do that it should fail. As I say to all passing dogs: "Don't bifurcate on my lawn!". Here's the listing of the ghostscript font directory on my system (non-debian, real maniy files, no soft links here):- [derij@pip build (master)]$ ll /usr/share/ghostscript/9.53.3/Resource/Font/ total 4448 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 152585 May 10 2022 C059-BdIta -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 146014 May 10 2022 C059-Bold -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 148928 May 10 2022 C059-Italic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 145084 May 10 2022 C059-Roman -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 43343 May 10 2022 D050000L -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 155992 May 10 2022 NimbusMonoPS-Bold -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 154177 May 10 2022 NimbusMonoPS-BoldItalic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 142983 May 10 2022 NimbusMonoPS-Italic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 140353 May 10 2022 NimbusMonoPS-Regular -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 133004 May 10 2022 NimbusRoman-Bold -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 140953 May 10 2022 NimbusRoman-BoldItalic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 142085 May 10 2022 NimbusRoman-Italic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 133527 May 10 2022 NimbusRoman-Regular -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 107795 May 10 2022 NimbusSans-Bold -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 123308 May 10 2022 NimbusSans-BoldItalic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 120927 May 10 2022 NimbusSans-Italic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 106239 May 10 2022 NimbusSansNarrow-Bold -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 109815 May 10 2022 NimbusSansNarrow-BoldOblique -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 107359 May 10 2022 NimbusSansNarrow-Oblique -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 104252 May 10 2022 NimbusSansNarrow-Regular -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 104001 May 10 2022 NimbusSans-Regular -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 162196 May 10 2022 P052-Bold -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 163906 May 10 2022 P052-BoldItalic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 161531 May 10 2022 P052-Italic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 159843 May 10 2022 P052-Roman -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 31444 May 10 2022 StandardSymbolsPS -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 137163 May 10 2022 URWBookman-Demi -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 142686 May 10 2022 URWBookman-DemiItalic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 137614 May 10 2022 URWBookman-Light -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 143233 May 10 2022 URWBookman-LightItalic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 100637 May 10 2022 URWGothic-Book -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 102403 May 10 2022 URWGothic-BookOblique -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 103428 May 10 2022 URWGothic-Demi -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 105110 May 10 2022 URWGothic-DemiOblique -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 166540 May 10 2022 Z003-MediumItalic Thanks for your help, almost there, just un-bifurcate the check. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63808> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/
