On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 03:16:41AM +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> You didn't say it was gnome-terminal... Well, gnome-terminal uses bitmap
> fonts, but it silently fails when you select a font that doesn't contain
> all the characters needed for the encoding corresponding to your locale.
>
> If you know how to modify the fonts to have all the characters, I'm
> willing to try, as I package xfonts-gimpers, and a couple in there are
> broken.
Gnome-terminal2 cannot see 75dpi fonts at all. It only sees the ones
which are 100dpi (I checked both of the neep options it offered, they were
100dpi, and I happen to know that those two are the only 100dpi versions.
Other 75dpi only fonts don't show up at all.
I asked, was told this was Pango's doing, and that it was well-known. If
I have been given wrong information, then I should file a bug, but getting
right information seems to be a difficult prospect.
It did silently fail on a couple other fonts, however. I suspect that was
the problem you describe above. I don't have font editing experience or I
would help jmk unicodify the jmk fonts (since this is a task he's working
on himself..)
I must say that after some reflection and a bit of unrelated good news for
a change (see below), I owe a few people an apology for my sour reactions
to them regarding a few of the problems I've found lately. I fear some of
the people to whom an apology is due will not take it as sincere because I
don't apologize for some of the things I've said.
When I find a problem in pre-release software, I assume it's a fluke which
an end-user of the final product will never see. I ask for a workaround
and use any advice I may get to try and fix the problem, along with my own
tinkering. If this doesn't work, I ask for more advice, and again try to
ensure that what I see is truly a bug. _Then_, if I actually have enough
information to report a bug which can be identified anf fixed, I'll do so.
Depending on how busy I get with other things, this can take (and as with
this problem in Nautilus, has in fact taken) a couple of days to be sure
that I'm actually reporting a bug and not some misconfiguration. I won't
apologize for doing this, because I believe it's responsible behavior and
honestly wish more people would follow my example in this, especially if
they're reporting bugs in _my_ code.
Of course, when I take the time to do all of this, and find my problems
ignored or denied, I tend to get very frustrated, annoyed, and even a
little angry, sometimes without meaning to. This usually makes my problem
be heard loud enough that it cannot be outright ignored, but certainly
doesn't make any friends. When this happens, some have gone far enough to
suggest that I must be an idiot because otherwise I wouldn't be having a
problem. This of course makes me definitely, justifyably angry. I don't
apologize for nasty replies to such rude comments because they are IMO
deserved.
But others have actually tried to help, even sometimes the same people who
have .. not been very polite otherwise. When a person is offering help,
even if they basically have NFI what the problem is, I shouldn't react (or
continue to react) in a hostile manner. FFS, they're trying to help after
all, and there's a good chance they have no better idea what's wrong than
I've got. For this, I do owe several people an apology. Not all of them
are on this list to read it either. For those not, I'll have to try and
catch them on irc or so, because I have really been an ass to them. Sure
some of them have also been an ass to me, but that's no excuse if I'm
concerned more about the software in question than my bruised ego.
> > I was hoping it might be so, thanks. I've been trying various things
> > suggested to "fix my font setup" since that is what people have been
> > telling me is wrong. They told me to trust them that it was not a bug, so
> > I hadn't filed it as one yet. This morning I got someone to look over all
> > of my relevant configs and ensure that they were correct. I've been at
> > this for a couple days now, it's not like this is the first time I've
> > mentioned this problem to anyone.
>
> Actually, it is a gnome-control-center bug, it will be fixed in the
> release following 1.99.10.
Eh? If it's a gnomecc2 bug, how is it fixed by Nautilus 1.1.19 as was
indicated this morning? I was flamed this morning for not upgrading to
1.1.19 yet (damned modem!) which was reported to fix the problem. I've
not done so yet as I just got home. It's downloaded and all, so after I
finish this message I'll be upgrading it and half a dozen other Gnome2
packages.
If I'm going to be flamed for not upgrading to a fixed version of a thing
which was just uploaded before I complain that there is a problem, at the
very leas the new version should actually fix that problem, I would hope.
Either way, the important thing is that the problem be identified and
corrected. It also helps if several people happen to know what the
problem is so the next person who comes along with the problem has a
chance of getting help with it.
> Fri May 10 19:00:25 2002 Jonathan Blandford <jrb@redhat.com>
>
> * main.c (DESKTOP_FONT_NAME_KEY): get it to use the right key.
>
> You can still edit /apps/nautilus/preferences/desktop_font by hand, with
> gconf-editor though.
Okay, I can tell you I don't have this key. I added it, gconf-editor
crashed, I reran it and added .../preferences/desktop_font_size as well,
it crashed again. Time to grab the source and build this thing for
debugging, Gnome's registry editor ;) should not die when you add keys
like that, and this looks reproducable enough to buttonhole the actual
cause for a change!
And BTW... THANK YOU! Adding the first key fixed the problem. The
second was an experiment on my part, but the key seems not to be
recognized. If you happen to know the name of the key for changing the
size of the font, I'd greatly appreciate knowing. (If you do not know, it
is not strictly necessary as the chosen default size is readable at this
resolution/size..)
I mentioned unrelated good news above, though I'm not sure how many people
here actually _care_ really. I was gone all day today because I was out
apartment hunting. Several Debian people here know from other lists and
discussions that I'm currently staying with a friend while I look for an
apartment. I found several very nice ones, all available when I need them
and _affordable_. More importantly, they all have available broadband
access. I've been sharing a 56k modem with five other machines for the
past month or two. That makes it really hard to do things like follow
Gnome2 CVS, which is really necessary if I want to actually help make
Gnome2 ready for the general public sooner rather than just bitch about
things that don't work for me and should.
I imagine it's quite hard for a few people who don't know about my work on
other projects to imagine, but I'm not half bad at QA stuff when I can
actually follow the code as it's being developed. I'm also known to do
things like *gasp* submit intelligent bug reports with working patches
when I can do so, as opposed to what I've been able to offer so far which
far too often looks something like "umm, this doesn't work. It used to
though, so please fix it." Big difference there, ne?
I'll probably be moving in around the beginning of July, and should have
working broadband within a week or two of moving in if all goes well. =)
--
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@bluecherry.net> Have chainsaw will travel
<apt> it has been said that redhat is the thing Marc Ewing wears on
his head.
Attachment:
pgpw58zwd7179.pgp
Description: PGP signature