On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Pablo Saratxaga wrote:

>> I'd like to clarify an assumption with encodings.dir files.  If I 
>> understand correctly, the encodings.dir files are no longer 
>> required, having been replaced now by the encodings and 
>> encodings/large subdirectories.
>> 
>> I read something earlier to the effect that encodings.dir is not
>> needed, but is still supported if the files happen to be there.
>> 
>> Is there any useful purpose to me shipping these files?  
>
>I don't know for you.
>But the ability to have a local encodings.dir to override the default one
>is useful to handle some wrong ttf fonts that wrongly claim to be in cp1251
>i nther unicode table, while they are in fact in another completly different
>encoding.
>
>On the other side, if you ship only fonts with correct unicode tables
>there is no need for the encodings.dir

Right..  I wasn't suggesting disabling the source code that looks 
for encodings.dir files, but rather just not shipping any 
encodings.dir files.  If a user were to place an encodings.dir 
file back in the dir, the I assume it would still work.  If it 
isn't a necessity though, I'd rather not ship them by default 
unless it causes someone problems not having them.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike A. Harris                  Shipping/mailing address:
OS Systems Engineer             190 Pittsburgh Ave., Sault Ste. Marie,
XFree86 maintainer              Ontario, Canada, P6C 5B3
Red Hat Inc.                    Phone: (705)949-2136
http://www.redhat.com           ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
Red Hat XFree86 mailing list:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General open IRC discussion:    #xfree86 on irc.openprojects.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts

Reply via email to