Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Is it in the latest _stable_ build? Should I wait for the new one? Or should I rather risk installing today's devel build? Sergey On 8/24/07, Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Also note that we need Pango 1.18 (just released) for Ethiopian to work; > J5 says this is now in our builds. > > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 10:01 -0400, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > > Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > > > > Would you try the Ethiopian XIM in en_US locale (replacing Compose file)? > > > > I'm afraid I'm totally ignorant of the subject. How is the Xlib compose > > handling > > supposed to work in applications? Would it also work in Write.activity? > > > > By the way, the am_ET.UTF-8 locale appears to work with glibc 2.90 from > > Fedora > > Development. We'll need to backport a fix or upgrade glibc if we want > > Ethiopian > > support in the OLPC. > > > -- > Jim Gettys > One Laptop Per Child > > > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
> I'm afraid I'm totally ignorant of the subject. How is the Xlib compose > handling > supposed to work in applications? Would it also work in Write.activity? First, you should replace Compose file (in /usr/share/X11/locale/en_US.UTF-8). In addition, setting GTK_IM_MODULE=xim should explain gtk+ apps they have to use XIM. That's about it IIRC. > By the way, the am_ET.UTF-8 locale appears to work with glibc 2.90 from Fedora > Development. We'll need to backport a fix or upgrade glibc if we want > Ethiopian > support in the OLPC. Sure! We cannot progress if we do not have that locale properly working. Sergey ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Bernardo, Would you try the Ethiopian XIM in en_US locale (replacing Compose file)? Sergey On 8/24/07, Bernardo Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > > FWIW, yesterday I setup LANG=am_ET.UTF-8 in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and > > rebooted. Sugar was not even able to start (I am using the latest > > stable image). Pure X server starts ok. There were errors during the > > boot process as well (some services reported "FAILED" startup). If > > anyone is interested, I could provide more details. > > The same happened to me too. Seems like a severe bug in glibc's > locale description. For example, the sort comand would output > lines sorted by length instead of alphabetically! > > I'll try again with fedora devel's RPM. If it doesn't work, then > I guess we should file a bug upstream. > > -- >// Bernardo Innocenti > \X/ http://www.codewiz.org/ > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
FWIW, yesterday I setup LANG=am_ET.UTF-8 in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and rebooted. Sugar was not even able to start (I am using the latest stable image). Pure X server starts ok. There were errors during the boot process as well (some services reported "FAILED" startup). If anyone is interested, I could provide more details. So I had to fallback to en_US.UTF-8. It seems it will take some preparation to get to the stage when we could actually perform real (not fake) test of the Ethiopian keyboard input in Ethiopian locale. Sergey On 8/23/07, Bernardo Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > > When you replace simplified fonts with the full version: are you able > > to input Ethiopean with the code provided? > > I assumed it would, but now I installed the dejavu-fonts RPM and the > Ethiopean glyphs still don't display neither in the Write activity, > nor in the Web activity. > > On my F7 box, there must be some fontconfig magic that makes them > work. But I couldn't figure out how. > > -- >// Bernardo Innocenti > \X/ http://www.codewiz.org/ > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Bernardo, When you replace simplified fonts with the full version: are you able to input Ethiopean with the code provided? Sergey On 8/22/07, Bernardo Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (I'm moving to devel@ so we don't need to Cc too many people) > > Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > > Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > > I cannot tell you which font was used by my Ubuntu - I just see those > > > glyphs rendered more of less correctly (see attached). If you're > > > interested, I can provide you with the list of fonts I have installed. > > > > I see them just fine in Firefox on my F7 development machine, but not on > > the laptop. Weird... > > It turns out that the DejaVu font has the Ethiopian glyphs, but > there's also a simplified font called DejaVuLGC which is what > we're shipping on the OLPC. > > I just talked with Walter and J5 and we agreed that it makes no sense > to ship a huge font with all glyphs when we're already going to have > a custom images for each country where we can easily add language > specific fonts. > > But now I looked at DejaVu to see how bigger it is and it seems to > me that it's not worth it after all: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 448K 2007-08-11 07:42 DejaVuLGCSans.ttf > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 557K 2007-08-11 07:42 DejaVuSans.ttf > > The RPMs for the complete DejaVu font are even *smaller*: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0M 2007-08-11 07:43 > dejavu-fonts-2.19-1.fc8.noarch.rpm > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3.3M 2007-08-11 07:42 > dejavu-lgc-fonts-2.19-1.noarch.rpm > > (but that's because DejaVuLGC also comes with Condensed variants). > > So, is there another reason why we couldn't just switch to it? > Currently, we're shipping arabic and thai fonts in all builds. > If the DejaVu support for these languages is good enough, we > could save even more space. > > -- >// Bernardo Innocenti > \X/ http://www.codewiz.org/ > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 22:26 +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > Is it in the latest _stable_ build? Should I wait for the new one? Or > should I rather risk installing today's devel build? No, current builds.. Eg. 556, which I installed on 3 systems (B3, B4, and CTest) this afternoon. - Jim > > Sergey > > On 8/24/07, Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Also note that we need Pango 1.18 (just released) for Ethiopian to work; > > J5 says this is now in our builds. > > > > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 10:01 -0400, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > > > Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > > > > > > Would you try the Ethiopian XIM in en_US locale (replacing Compose > > > > file)? > > > > > > I'm afraid I'm totally ignorant of the subject. How is the Xlib compose > > > handling > > > supposed to work in applications? Would it also work in Write.activity? > > > > > > By the way, the am_ET.UTF-8 locale appears to work with glibc 2.90 from > > > Fedora > > > Development. We'll need to backport a fix or upgrade glibc if we want > > > Ethiopian > > > support in the OLPC. > > > > > -- > > Jim Gettys > > One Laptop Per Child > > > > > > -- Jim Gettys One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Also note that we need Pango 1.18 (just released) for Ethiopian to work; J5 says this is now in our builds. On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 10:01 -0400, Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > > Would you try the Ethiopian XIM in en_US locale (replacing Compose file)? > > I'm afraid I'm totally ignorant of the subject. How is the Xlib compose > handling > supposed to work in applications? Would it also work in Write.activity? > > By the way, the am_ET.UTF-8 locale appears to work with glibc 2.90 from Fedora > Development. We'll need to backport a fix or upgrade glibc if we want > Ethiopian > support in the OLPC. > -- Jim Gettys One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > Would you try the Ethiopian XIM in en_US locale (replacing Compose file)? I'm afraid I'm totally ignorant of the subject. How is the Xlib compose handling supposed to work in applications? Would it also work in Write.activity? By the way, the am_ET.UTF-8 locale appears to work with glibc 2.90 from Fedora Development. We'll need to backport a fix or upgrade glibc if we want Ethiopian support in the OLPC. -- // Bernardo Innocenti \X/ http://www.codewiz.org/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > FWIW, yesterday I setup LANG=am_ET.UTF-8 in /etc/sysconfig/i18n and > rebooted. Sugar was not even able to start (I am using the latest > stable image). Pure X server starts ok. There were errors during the > boot process as well (some services reported "FAILED" startup). If > anyone is interested, I could provide more details. The same happened to me too. Seems like a severe bug in glibc's locale description. For example, the sort comand would output lines sorted by length instead of alphabetically! I'll try again with fedora devel's RPM. If it doesn't work, then I guess we should file a bug upstream. -- // Bernardo Innocenti \X/ http://www.codewiz.org/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Bernardo Innocenti writes: > It turns out that the DejaVu font has the Ethiopian glyphs, but > there's also a simplified font called DejaVuLGC which is what > we're shipping on the OLPC. (LGC means Latic,Greek,Cyrillic -- simple left-to-right stuff) This situation is partly because the mere presense of non-LGC characters in a font can mildly screw up the rendering of the LGC characters. Add something like Arabic, and the kerning gets a bit messed up for the easier languages. It could be Pango bugs or Fontforge bugs. One could argue that non-LGC really isn't compatible with LGC. Whatever the case, there are problems that make full DejaVu a poor choice. Perhaps one could ship DejaVuLGC for LGC, then use the font set stuff (I forget the correct name) to have full DejaVu get substituted in for the characters DejaVuLGC is lacking. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > When you replace simplified fonts with the full version: are you able > to input Ethiopean with the code provided? I assumed it would, but now I installed the dejavu-fonts RPM and the Ethiopean glyphs still don't display neither in the Write activity, nor in the Web activity. On my F7 box, there must be some fontconfig magic that makes them work. But I couldn't figure out how. -- // Bernardo Innocenti \X/ http://www.codewiz.org/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
Hello Bernardo, All, I wonder about shipping DejaVuLGC, too. I ask the same questions a few weeks ago on #olpc / #sugar but didn't get an answer. Ok, it is irc and not a mailinglist. Thanks for posting it here. IMHO we should try to switch from DejaVuLGC to DejaVu. Frontiers are not perforce language borders. So it would be fine to have as much fonts on the XO as posible. There is always the chance to switch back. Besides we have less packages and maybe more space for free. Regards, yokoy On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:01:17 -0400 Bernardo Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (I'm moving to devel@ so we don't need to Cc too many people) > > Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > > Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > > I cannot tell you which font was used by my Ubuntu - I just see those > > > glyphs rendered more of less correctly (see attached). If you're > > > interested, I can provide you with the list of fonts I have installed. > > > > I see them just fine in Firefox on my F7 development machine, but not on > > the laptop. Weird... > > It turns out that the DejaVu font has the Ethiopian glyphs, but > there's also a simplified font called DejaVuLGC which is what > we're shipping on the OLPC. > > I just talked with Walter and J5 and we agreed that it makes no sense > to ship a huge font with all glyphs when we're already going to have > a custom images for each country where we can easily add language > specific fonts. > > But now I looked at DejaVu to see how bigger it is and it seems to > me that it's not worth it after all: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 448K 2007-08-11 07:42 DejaVuLGCSans.ttf > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 557K 2007-08-11 07:42 DejaVuSans.ttf > > The RPMs for the complete DejaVu font are even *smaller*: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0M 2007-08-11 07:43 > dejavu-fonts-2.19-1.fc8.noarch.rpm > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3.3M 2007-08-11 07:42 > dejavu-lgc-fonts-2.19-1.noarch.rpm > > (but that's because DejaVuLGC also comes with Condensed variants). > > So, is there another reason why we couldn't just switch to it? > Currently, we're shipping arabic and thai fonts in all builds. > If the DejaVu support for these languages is good enough, we > could save even more space. > > -- >// Bernardo Innocenti > \X/ http://www.codewiz.org/ > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: DejaVu fonts (Was: Ethiopean)
(I'm moving to devel@ so we don't need to Cc too many people) Bernardo Innocenti wrote: > Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > I cannot tell you which font was used by my Ubuntu - I just see those > > glyphs rendered more of less correctly (see attached). If you're > > interested, I can provide you with the list of fonts I have installed. > > I see them just fine in Firefox on my F7 development machine, but not on > the laptop. Weird... It turns out that the DejaVu font has the Ethiopian glyphs, but there's also a simplified font called DejaVuLGC which is what we're shipping on the OLPC. I just talked with Walter and J5 and we agreed that it makes no sense to ship a huge font with all glyphs when we're already going to have a custom images for each country where we can easily add language specific fonts. But now I looked at DejaVu to see how bigger it is and it seems to me that it's not worth it after all: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 448K 2007-08-11 07:42 DejaVuLGCSans.ttf -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 557K 2007-08-11 07:42 DejaVuSans.ttf The RPMs for the complete DejaVu font are even *smaller*: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.0M 2007-08-11 07:43 dejavu-fonts-2.19-1.fc8.noarch.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3.3M 2007-08-11 07:42 dejavu-lgc-fonts-2.19-1.noarch.rpm (but that's because DejaVuLGC also comes with Condensed variants). So, is there another reason why we couldn't just switch to it? Currently, we're shipping arabic and thai fonts in all builds. If the DejaVu support for these languages is good enough, we could save even more space. -- // Bernardo Innocenti \X/ http://www.codewiz.org/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
