[Pkg-fonts-devel] Should we comaintain fontforge?

Ralf Stubner ralf.stubner at web.de
Sun Apr 2 17:28:45 UTC 2006

On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 17:19 +0300, K?stutis Bili?nas wrote:
> I have prepared the new version of the fontforge package.

That is great. I haven't looked at the package yet, but have you done
any changes with respect to libuninameslist? The current setup seems to
not work correctly. From a discussion on fontforge-devel ('BUG: No.
symbol marked as ligature.', 2006-02-03):

,----[ George Williams ]
|  On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 06:38, Ralf Stubner wrote:
| > Thanks, I will give the patch a try. I am working on a Debian system
| > where I typically use the source packages provided by Debian, drop in a
| > newer fontforge tar ball and compile the thing. AFAICT this also
| > includes compiling libuninameslist, but it seems to be used as a static
| > library. Is there any way to tell if this static linking works? Other
| > libraries are linked dynamically.
| um, usually libuninameslist is dlopened
| It is possible to link it statically (at least it's supposed to be, I'm
| not sure I've tested it), but you would have to add the appropriate
| #define manually somewhere... my configure script doesn't do it.
| That said, you can tell if ff has found libuninameslist by
|         $ fontforge -new
|         let the cursor hover over the (blank) "A" glyph
|         You should get a tool tips window
|            "65 0x41 U+0041 "A" LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A"
|                 means you've got libuninameslist.
|            "65 0x41 U+0041 "A"[ Basic Latin]"
|                 means you don't

(The text in '[]' is a corrected typo.)

>      - switch from using patch to quilt.



More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel mailing list