Il giorno mar 24 lug 2018 alle 21:37, Urs Liska <[email protected]>
ha scritto:
Am 24.07.2018 um 20:48 schrieb David Wright:
On Tue 24 Jul 2018 at 18:50:27 (+0200), Urs Liska wrote:
Is it possible that the problem is due to an old fontconfig version
used by LilyPond? my Debian package is 2.13.0, the LilyPond
directory suggests a version 1.9.2 (is that possible?).
Can you be a bit more specific about what versioning you mean.
Here (Debian stretch):
david 270584 Jun 24 07:12
/home/david/lilypond-2.19.82-1/lilypond/usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1.9.2
root 252968 Aug 24 2016
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfontconfig.so.1.8.0
ii fontconfig 2.11.0-6.7+b1 amd64 generic font configuration library
- support binaries
ii libfontconfig1:amd64 2.11.0-6.7+b1 amd64 generic font
configuration library - runtime
It seems as if you're comparing package versions with library
versions.
Indeed, I don't really know what I'm talking about.
On my system I have installed
$ apt show fontconfig
Package: fontconfig
Version: 2.13.0-5
which includes a libfontconfig1 package of that same version.
In my system directories I have:
$ ls -l /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ | grep fontconfig
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 492422 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.a
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so ->
libfontconfig.so.1.11.1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so.1 ->
libfontconfig.so.1.11.1
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 273368 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so.1.11.1
and within the LilyPond installation (like you)
$ ls -l ~/software/lilypond/releases/2.19.82/usr/lib/ | grep
fontconfig
-rwxr-xr-x 1 uliska uliska 1086 Jun 24 14:10 libfontconfig.la
lrwxrwxrwx 1 uliska uliska 22 Mai 20 2017 libfontconfig.so ->
libfontconfig.so.1.9.2
lrwxrwxrwx 1 uliska uliska 22 Mai 20 2017 libfontconfig.so.1
-> libfontconfig.so.1.9.2
-rwxr-xr-x 1 uliska uliska 270584 Jun 24 14:12
libfontconfig.so.1.9.2
Am I right to think that LilyPond uses the bundled library (1.9.2?)
while fc-list uses 1.11.1?
If so, would that be an explanation for the differences in the
reported font names? Or could it be related to some code in LilyPond,
how that *uses* fontconfig?
As David wrote, you are still comparing library versions with
fontconfig versions.
I think you should check what `fc-list --version` shows for each
installation. I don't think that library versioning matters.
As an example, see the difference between the lilypond.org 2.18.2
packaged installed in /opt and my Fedora 2.19.82 package:
[~]$ ls /opt/lilypond/usr/lib/ | grep fontconfig
libfontconfig.la
libfontconfig.so
libfontconfig.so.1
libfontconfig.so.1.4.4
[~]$ ls /usr/lib64/ | grep fontconfig
libfontconfig.so
libfontconfig.so.1
libfontconfig.so.1.11.1
[~]$ /opt/lilypond/usr/bin/fc-list --version
fontconfig version 2.8.0
[~]$ fc-list --version
fontconfig version 2.13.0
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
