Public bug reported: Binary package hint: libmagick9
Regarding one of our web servers, a co-worker of mine filed an internal bug with this text: > ImageMagick fonts don't get properly configured -- this seems like it > may be a package bug to me, though I'm not sure. > Basically /usr/lib/ImageMagick-6.2.4/config/type.xml, as installed, > refers to type-ghostscript.xml, which refers to fonts that are not > installed (we don't have any Type 1 fonts installed). The ImageMagick > examples page ( http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~anthony/graphics/imagick6/ ) > suggests using a script to enumerate fonts: > http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~anthony/graphics/imagick6/scripts/imagick_type_gen > (this produces a replacement for type.xml). I did that and it seems to work > fine. The proper way would probably involve having every installed font > package add a file to be included in type.xml. (Well, ideally, there would be > a type.d directory, I suppose :) ) Our needing to edit a configuration file which is stored in /usr/lib/ImageMagick-6.2.4/config makes me nervous. It's going to get overwritten on upgrades, since it's not a conffile, right? ** Affects: imagemagick (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: Unconfirmed -- ImageMagick Font Issues https://launchpad.net/bugs/69531 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
