On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 10:03:22AM +0300, Mishustin Alexey wrote: > I discovered that both fonts patterns (that used in mtink and that used > in the patch) are not right. Here are the results of my xlsfonts > command: > > $ xlsfonts -fn 'l-*-r-normal-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-koi8-ru' > xlsfonts: pattern "l-*-r-normal-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-koi8-ru" unmatched > > $ xlsfonts -fn 'l-*-r-normal-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-koi8-r' > xlsfonts: pattern "l-*-r-normal-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-koi8-r" unmatched > > And the right patterns are these ones: > > '*-r-normal-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-koi8-r' (a lot of fonts), > '*bold-r-normal-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-koi8-r' (less but a lot too). > > So, I patched the sources according to this (thinking "Thats'it! It will > work!") but oops... Mtink is showing now the same unreadable symbols and > saying the error message with really right font patterns: > > $ mtink > Warning: Cannot convert string "*-urw palladio > *bold-r-normal-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-koi8-r" to type FontStruct > Warning: Cannot convert string "*-urw palladio > *-r-normal-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-koi8-r" to type FontStruct > > To be sure, I copipasted patterns just from this error message to > xlsfonts and got again a lot of fonts. > > Here must be something else, what do you think?
Unfortunately, I am not a font expert at all. To be frank, I have really no idea. I suggest to talk directly with upstream author, which have maybe a better idea. Thanks for the bug report and in advance to M. Sarton Sylvain Le Gall ps: for M. Sarton, the upstream author, which is in copy of this mail, can you "reply to all" and especially the bug number so that the Debian bugs tracking will work. You can find the full length discussion at this URL: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=504317 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
