[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#91257: PROPOSED] changes to X font policy



On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 06:29:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 03:08:30AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > * Some rewording to reflect the new must/should/may policy.
> 
> > -		Fonts of any type supported by the X Window System
> > -		should be be in a separate binary package from any
> > -		executables, libraries, or documentation (except that
> > -		specific to the fonts shipped);
> 
> > +		Fonts of any type supported by the X Window System must be
> > +		be in a separate binary package from any executables,
> > +		libraries, or documentation (except that specific to the
> > +		fonts shipped).
> > +		<footnote>
> > +			This is because the X server may retrieve fonts
> > +			from the local filesystem or over the network from
> > +			an X font server; the Debian package system is
> > +			empowered to deal only with the local filesystem.
> > +		</footnote>
> 
> This seems like a good idea, but why is the alternative unacceptable
> (must instead of should)?

Let's say my X server is configured thus:

Section "Files"
   RgbPath    "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/rgb"
   FontPath   "big-honkin-font-server.mycompany.com:7100"
EndSection

I install dosemu, which contains this MS-DOS console thing, and ships a
"vga" X font for the purpose.  Dosemu doesn't work.  Damn.  Why?  Because
the dosemu package assumes that being on the local filesystem is good
enough.  It's not.  Not unless the client program has routines to rasterize
the font for itself straight off the filesystem, and then blit these into
its window.  I don't know of a program that does this.

Same goes for nethack.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson             |    Kissing girls is a goodness.  It is a
Debian GNU/Linux                |    growing closer.  It beats the hell out
branden@debian.org              |    of card games.
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ |    -- Robert Heinlein

Attachment: pgpnny_fZ1RJ6.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: