Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
Maybe some good people could just fork it? Like LinuxMint or Gentoo? > 30 лип. 2019 р. о 05:53 Eli Schwartz via arch-general > написав(ла): > > On 7/29/19 10:35 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: >> So Gnome just KDE4'ed pango Type 1 support. It is bewildering why support >> simply can't remain. Nothing like pacman -Syu and having things break -- >> things that have been working -- forever. >> >> Whatever the fight between Cairo and Pango over FC_face locking -- that seems >> like what needs to be fixed instead of simply dropping support for an entire >> class of fonts. >> >> Progress. Oh well. > > Yes, '"progress"' just about sums up gnome. Though I think KDE4 had a > better excuse for being dropped. ;) > > Of course, given the blog post in which all this is being discussed, it > would also be nice if pango actually had active contributors. > Apparently, people really interested in making fonts better, are in rare > supply. (Not that I can really sympathize, since I'm not even much > interested in caring what fonts look like when they're installed on my > computer.) > > -- > Eli Schwartz > Bug Wrangler and Trusted User >
Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
On 7/29/19 10:35 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: > So Gnome just KDE4'ed pango Type 1 support. It is bewildering why support > simply can't remain. Nothing like pacman -Syu and having things break -- > things that have been working -- forever. > > Whatever the fight between Cairo and Pango over FC_face locking -- that seems > like what needs to be fixed instead of simply dropping support for an entire > class of fonts. > > Progress. Oh well. Yes, '"progress"' just about sums up gnome. Though I think KDE4 had a better excuse for being dropped. ;) Of course, given the blog post in which all this is being discussed, it would also be nice if pango actually had active contributors. Apparently, people really interested in making fonts better, are in rare supply. (Not that I can really sympathize, since I'm not even much interested in caring what fonts look like when they're installed on my computer.) -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
On 07/28/2019 06:49 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote: > Hi, > > To save others' time, on upgrading to pango 1:1.44-1 today my terminal > emulator and other programs displayed empty boxes instead of bitmap-font > glyphs. This is due to deliberate dropping of support by Pango. > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/386 > > I don't think xterm(1) uses Pango given ldd(1)'s output, and it's > happily displaying nice crisp glyphs. > So Gnome just KDE4'ed pango Type 1 support. It is bewildering why support simply can't remain. Nothing like pacman -Syu and having things break -- things that have been working -- forever. Whatever the fight between Cairo and Pango over FC_face locking -- that seems like what needs to be fixed instead of simply dropping support for an entire class of fonts. Progress. Oh well. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
On 7/29/19 8:31 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote: > It's worth keeping an eye on > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/386 Yep -- great issue to keep an eye on. "I was told that you intentionally removed support for this, is that true?" "Yes, that's why the blog post said so." "Well, but what are the upstream developers of pango-based applications supposed to do then?" "Nothing, there is no replacement. Pango doesn't support bitmap fonts anymore. Just like it said in the blog post." "Are bitmap fonts deprecated?" "..." > If you look at the > ‘History’ tab of https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/63297 you'll see I > asked for this link to be added to the issue but that was refused. > The mentioned blog post, deemed sufficent, leaves the reader stranded. Reading the linked issue will leave users just as stranded. So, I guess I'm a bit curious why you're so dead set on adding a link to the bug tracker. Do you know what a bug tracker is? It's a place for, well, tracking bugs. For triaging them, filtering based on their triage status, and discussing the efforts which have been expended towards fixing them. *There is no bug and nothing to fix. Pango does not support bitmap fonts anymore, and nothing other than convincing upstream to change their minds will make that stop being the case.* Since this is *not* the first time you've had this issue, Ralph, I would like to ask you: what is your divergent opinion on what a bugtracker is? - A personal mechanism to pass notes addressed to Eli Schwartz? (That last reopen request...) Please use email instead... Submitting a reopen request with the sole effort of arguing with the Bug Wranglers about why "you're wrong" for repeatedly refusing to reopen it, is *not* a productive way to discuss the matter. - A bulletin board for disseminating "vital" information to Arch users? If it's that important, we have a news feed. - A place for users to get together and discuss migration options? That's what a forum is for. - A place to collect all sorts of information on a subject, organize it into topics, index it for speedy access by users, and establish as the authoritative source for most of the Linux world to research, discover, and share information on the topic? It sounds like you've just described the famous Arch Wiki! Why are you so supremely dead set on necromantically raising a dead subject on the bugtracker, where it is difficult to find as well as being offtopic, when you could write a whole thesis paper on the subject, free of charge, on the wiki, and: - get thanked - have people ask you to write even more - provide a resource that, even next year or next decade, will be easily found and receive lots of visibility with no need to search - get a better page ranking in google while simultaneously raising the page ranking for the rest of the wiki Why do you insist on hiding information in the bugtracker where only Arch users today will find it, and Arch users tomorrow will *not* find it, nor will Debian or Fedora or Slackware or users ever find it at all (because they're not following recent Arch activity during the pango release cycle, and by the time some stable distro gets the pango update, everything has blown over). Please devote your wonderful desire to help out and share knowledge, in the recommended direction: improving the canonical documentation. :) It would be great if you could add a troubleshooting section to the Fonts article or something. If there was some sort of stable mechanism for indexing the information, and allowing users to update and refine their suggestions for living in a post-1.44 pango world, then I could even be convinced that it's worth adding a note to the bugtracker to that effect. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
> >>> You can convert your BDF/PCF fonts to the "X11 bitmap only sfnt >>> (otb)" OpenType format[1], which harfbuzz does support[2]. >> >> So these aren't "my" fonts. I'm using one of the bitmapped fonts that >> ships with X in xorg-fonts-misc as my terminal font. > > `My' bitmap fonts are also packaged. Hi Ralph, With 'your' bitmap fonts I also meant fonts you use, not only those you created or maintain. Doing the conversion yourself is only meant as a workaround if you really need them now, but you could offer the converted fonts in the AUR and become a maintainer if upstream is not interested. > There doesn't seem much point packaging a font in a format that isn't > supported by most software. The xorg-fonts packages are primarily meant for applications using XLFD (can only use bitmap fonts) or Xft (FreeType based, so bitmap fonts still work). > It would seem the upstreams, GNU and X.Org, should ship those fonts > in the current and OpenType-bitmap formats That would be for the best. > > Speaking of conversion, ProgAndy mentioned an Adobe program. The Adobe program is not useful for bitmap fonts, but the conversion of postscript/type1 (.pfa, .pfb) fonts to the opentype format. I mentioned it for completeness, since support for that format has been dropped as well. > > And FontForge should be able to do it > https://fontforge.github.io/generate.html lists ‘X11 bitmap only sfnt > (otb)’ amongst the bitmap types. > I found the scripts used to convert terminus to a mixed bitmap/vector font using fontforge, mkbold-mkitalic, and potrace. If you choose a font size that matches a bitmap height, then the resulting font will use the bitmap, otherwise the generated vector outlines [see *Notes*]. You could also try to declare your fontsize in pixel with a "px" suffix. This can be adapted to create a bitmap-only font in the "otb" format as well if you remove the potrace stuff and change the output file format from ttf to otb. https://files.ax86.net/terminus-ttf/#mkttf https://github.com/Tblue/mkttf *Notes* about the relationship between font sizes and bitmap dimensions: Font size is measured in typographic points: 1pt = 1/72 in. In a standard 96 dpi environment, that would be ~1.3 px. A 9pt font would be 12px tall. A 12pt font would be 16px tall. With a HiDPI display this is not true anymore, and with mixed DPI you might have to make sure that your chosen size resolves to an available bitmap in either case. -- Andy
Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
Hi David, > > You can convert your BDF/PCF fonts to the "X11 bitmap only sfnt > > (otb)" OpenType format[1], which harfbuzz does support[2]. > > So these aren't "my" fonts. I'm using one of the bitmapped fonts that > ships with X in xorg-fonts-misc as my terminal font. `My' bitmap fonts are also packaged. $ fc-list :outline=False file | > sed 's/: $//' | > xargs -rd\\n pacman -Qqo | > sort -Vu bdf-unifont xorg-fonts-100dpi xorg-fonts-misc $ > Does anyone know if there's any plans for these fonts to be usable > with pango going forward? There doesn't seem much point packaging a font in a format that isn't supported by most software. It would seem the upstreams, GNU and X.Org, should ship those fonts in the current and OpenType-bitmap formats, otherwise all packagers on every distro will come under pressure to convert during packaging. Speaking of conversion, ProgAndy mentioned an Adobe program. There's also https://github.com/fonttools/fonttools, packaged on Arch, that looks like it might be able to do it given its support for the EBDT and EBLC tables. And FontForge should be able to do it https://fontforge.github.io/generate.html lists ‘X11 bitmap only sfnt (otb)’ amongst the bitmap types. It's worth keeping an eye on https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/386 If you look at the ‘History’ tab of https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/63297 you'll see I asked for this link to be added to the issue but that was refused. The mentioned blog post, deemed sufficent, leaves the reader stranded. gimp users are also impacted by this; their collection of bitmap fonts are now unusable. -- Cheers, Ralph.
Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
On 7/28/19 3:52 PM, ProgAndy wrote: Am 28.07.19 um 20:35 schrieb David Rosenstrauch: On 7/28/19 7:49 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote: Hi, To save others' time, on upgrading to pango 1:1.44-1 today my terminal emulator and other programs displayed empty boxes instead of bitmap-font glyphs. This is due to deliberate dropping of support by Pango. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/386 I don't think xterm(1) uses Pango given ldd(1)'s output, and it's happily displaying nice crisp glyphs. Yeah, I just discovered this the hard way. Very annoying. Doesn't seem like there's any fix/workaround either. DR Hello, You can convert your BDF/PCF fonts to the "X11 bitmap only sfnt (otb)" OpenType format[1], which harfbuzz does support[2]. So these aren't "my" fonts. I'm using one of the bitmapped fonts that ships with X in xorg-fonts-misc as my terminal font. Does anyone know if there's any plans for these fonts to be usable with pango going forward? Thanks, DR
Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
Am 28.07.19 um 20:35 schrieb David Rosenstrauch: > On 7/28/19 7:49 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote: >> Hi, >> >> To save others' time, on upgrading to pango 1:1.44-1 today my terminal >> emulator and other programs displayed empty boxes instead of bitmap-font >> glyphs. This is due to deliberate dropping of support by Pango. >> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/386 >> >> I don't think xterm(1) uses Pango given ldd(1)'s output, and it's >> happily displaying nice crisp glyphs. > > Yeah, I just discovered this the hard way. Very annoying. Doesn't seem > like there's any fix/workaround either. > > DR Hello, You can convert your BDF/PCF fonts to the "X11 bitmap only sfnt (otb)" OpenType format[1], which harfbuzz does support[2]. As far as I know, there are no tools that do this easily. (There are a few old projects on github that might give a starting point like bdf2ttf). You can probably script fontforge, though. I think it should also be possible to put all different bitmap sizes and codepages in a single file, but that might require more manual work. Adobe Type1 (PostScript) fonts can be converted to OTF with the Adobe Font Development Kit for OpenType (AFDKO)[3] (The AUR package is out of date). This format should be readble by harfbuzz as well. [1]: https://fontforge.github.io/bitmaponlysfnt.html#X11 [2]: https://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2019/05/25/pango-future-directions/ "Note that Harfbuzz does support loading bitmap-only OpenType fonts." [3]: https://adobe-type-tools.github.io/afdko/AFDKO-Overview.html -- Andy
Re: [arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
On 7/28/19 7:49 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote: Hi, To save others' time, on upgrading to pango 1:1.44-1 today my terminal emulator and other programs displayed empty boxes instead of bitmap-font glyphs. This is due to deliberate dropping of support by Pango. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/386 I don't think xterm(1) uses Pango given ldd(1)'s output, and it's happily displaying nice crisp glyphs. Yeah, I just discovered this the hard way. Very annoying. Doesn't seem like there's any fix/workaround either. DR
[arch-general] pango 1:1.44-1 Renders Bitmap Fonts as Boxes.
Hi, To save others' time, on upgrading to pango 1:1.44-1 today my terminal emulator and other programs displayed empty boxes instead of bitmap-font glyphs. This is due to deliberate dropping of support by Pango. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/386 I don't think xterm(1) uses Pango given ldd(1)'s output, and it's happily displaying nice crisp glyphs. -- Cheers, Ralph.
