|Subject:||Re: Proposed patch (Was: Font problems with 2.5.27 on MacOS)|
|Date:||Sun, 5 Jun 2005 14:36:45 -0700|
On Jun 5, 2005, at 2:13 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
It hadn't really occurred to me that this is a problem, since fontforge is used to build lilypond anyway. It is an issue for binary distributions, though.
Hmm, yes, I had not realized that it would add 10-15M.
That is, I think, a configuration option.
Actually, we're not just dealing with dfonts here. Verdana, for instance, is a tradtional MacOS font, as far as I can tell. Also, I think that some font files may have the pfa font already embedded, so going through the ttf version may entail a loss of quality.
I actually did have that running at some point (Same way as the fontforge technique, i.e. run the binary). It's slightly messier because you have to fish out the right ttf file. Also, lilypond then needs to run another conversion step for ttf to pfa, so I thought the fontforge technique was cleaner. I can resurrect that version of the code in a few hours, however. fondu IS two orders of magnitude smaller, now that I think about it.
It would not be impossible to embed the fondu code in lilypond, but that would definitely be more work, and at this stage in the release cycle, it's probably not a great idea to add a considerably amount of code for a marginal feature that is mostly needed on one platform.
Well no, at least on 10.4, lilypond tries to typeset that file by pulling in the AppleMyunjo and Hei dfonts (fontconfig seems to take a certain perverse pleasure in defaulting to fonts that lilypond has difficulty embedding). Are you successful typesetting the file on 10.3 ? The fondu converted fonts seem to work even worse than the fontforge converted fonts for this.
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|