Folks, Coincidentally, at the same time as Lukas, I found another font-related glitch, although I don't think it's the same:
\markup \override #'(font-name . "Nonexistent Bold") "ABC" With 2.22, this compiles without warning, and the resulting PDF contains the font "DejaVuSans-Bold" (according to pdffonts). With 2.23.82, it gives me GNU LilyPond 2.23.82 (running Guile 2.2) Processing `unfound-font.ly' Parsing... warning: cannot get postscript namewarning: no PostScript font name for font `/usr/share/fonts/google-noto-vf/NotoSans-VF.ttf'
warning: FreeType face has no PostScript font name Finding the ideal number of pages... Fitting music on 1 page... Drawing systems... Converting to `unfound-font.pdf'... Success: compilation successfully completed The resulting PDF is blank. In a sense, it's normal and good that you get warnings for a nonexistent font, but the warning isn't very user-friendly. Furthermore, I wonder if this hides a genuine problem because if I change "Nonexistent Bold" to just "Nonexistent", it compiles without warnings. However, the font I get in that case is not DejaVuSans as in 2.22, but NotoSans. Might be related to the fact that Fedora (which I use) changed the default fonts to the Noto family at some point: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DefaultToNotoFonts The first version that gives this new behavior is 2.23.8, which points to the update of dependencies in commit a34556fdda98d899620e708fcd54e911ca75ede0: FreeType 2.11.0 => 2.12.0 Fontconfig 2.13.1 => 2.14.0 Pango 1.48.7 => 1.50.6 Thoughts? Werner? Thanks, Jean
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature