Am 12.08.2010 06:11, schrieb Paul "TBBle" Hampson: > Sorry, I failed at Gmail again. >_< > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Paul "TBBle" Hampson <paul.hamp...@pobox.com> > Date: 12 August 2010 13:52 > Subject: Re: Should we expect Liberation fonts to be installed? > To: Scott Ritchie <sc...@open-vote.org> > > > On 8 August 2010 13:02, Scott Ritchie <sc...@open-vote.org> wrote: >> On 08/03/2010 01:57 PM, Scott Ritchie wrote: >>> I was looking through our fairly large collection of open font bugs and >>> realized that things might be a lot simpler if we took some opinionated >>> positions and just declared certain fonts to be dependencies and >>> expected all packagers to provide them. >>> >>> This is similar to bundling our own Tahoma, except much less work. >>> >>> >>> This bug, for instance, prevents Photoshop from working unless there is >>> an Arial font installed: http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9623 >>> >>> Wine doesn't seem to respect system-level fontconfig aliases, so even >>> though Liberation Sans is installed on the system Photoshop won't try to >>> use it in place of Arial. >>> >>> But if however we assumed that Liberation Sans was installed, we could >>> make things much better: a link/substitution for Arial->Liberation Sans >>> could be provided in our own registry (and similarly for Times New Roman >>> and Courier). An alternative is to simply symlink to the Liberation >>> Fonts in /usr/share/wine/fonts as though they were our own shipped fonts >>> (like Tahoma). >>> >>> This would make Photoshop think Arial was present and keep it >>> functional. Ideally the real Arial would be displayed if it was >>> installed (eg through winetricks corefonts or by installing the >>> distro-provided corefonts package). >>> >>> >>> A related question is whether to show "Arial" in the list of fonts (eg >>> notepad) when we're actually just providing a substituted Arial. My >>> inclination says no, however I'm not sure how it works internally and >>> what an application would expect. >>> >> >> Assuming for a moment this is a good idea, what's the best >> implementation? My inclination is to say some registry font links, but >> I'm not completely familiar with how that works. >> >> Will font links in the registry be ignored when the real font is present? > > (Wine-specific) Font Replacements will be ignored when the real font > is present. Those're the ones in HKCU\Software\Wine\Fonts\Replacements > and probably the ones you want to use. (Which could be supplanted or > supplemented by working FontConfig alias support...) > > (GDI) Font Links (ie. the same registry entries Windows uses) are > fallbacks for missing glyphs. Those're the ones in > HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\FontLink\SystemLink > > Font Substitutes _probably_ don't get ignored if a real font with that > name exists. Those're the ones in HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows > NT\CurrentVersion\FontSubstitutes and they're pretty purpose-specific. > The only entries we want for them in Wine are the ones described at > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/michkap/archive/2005/03/20/399322.aspx (which > should probably be the default in Wine anyway, at least the Tahoma > entry.)
Wow, can you please update http://wiki.winehq.org/FontLoadOrder with these great informations? -- Best Regards, André Hentschel
