https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129619
--- Comment #41 from Akira TAGOH <ta...@redhat.com> ---
I tried the following command to see the difference between
google-noto-sans-sinhala-fonts-20201206-10.fc36 and
google-noto-sans-sinhala-fonts-20201206^1.git0c78c8329-4.fc37. As a result, I
see the same result on both. thus, this isn't a font issue but rendering issue.
$ fc-query -f "%{fontversion}\n"
/usr/share/fonts/google-noto/NotoSansSinhala-Regular.ttf
131138
$ fc-query -f "%{fontversion}\n" NotoSansSinhala-Regular.ttf
131203
$ hb-view --text-file sinhala-test-file.txt --language si --font-file
/usr/share/fonts/google-noto/NotoSansSinhala-Regular.ttf -o f36.png -O png
$ hb-view --text-file sinhala-test-file.txt --language si --font-file
NotoSansSinhala-Regular.ttf -o f36.png -O png
We have harfbuzz-4.0.0-2.fc36.x86_64 in f36 and harfbuzz-5.2.0-fc37.x86_64.
something might be happened between them I guess.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129619
_______________________________________________
fonts-bugs mailing list -- fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to fonts-bugs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
